Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Agile business process development: why, how and when—applying Nonaka’s theory of knowledge transformation to business process development

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The traditional way of business process development is via creating a detailed model of a business process in question, acquiring an IT-system to support it, and then implementing it in the organizational practice. Acquiring a system can be done via designing and manufacturing it by the business itself, or via commissioning it to somebody else. Alternatively, a generic system can be bought and configured according to the business process model created. The traditional approach has a number of risks that become visible only during the latest phase of introducing the system in the organizational practice, e.g., when it becomes clear that the system does not fit the business and/or people who work in it. These risks could be mitigated by using an agile approach to the development of business processes. In agile approach: (a) the phases of process modeling, IT-system design, and manufacturing are merged into one, and (b) instead of using one big cycle, a series of smaller development cycles is used. The paper discusses what is needed to implement the agile approach, and in which business situations the agile approach is the most appropriate. Examples of tools to support agile development are presented and analyzed. The results presented in the paper have been achieved based on the knowledge transformation perspective along the lines suggested by Nonaka in SECI model. The modification of this model has been used to understand the risks and requirements connected to a particular process development strategy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This case comes from the experience of the first author.

  2. The data above were derived from ProBis system logs on 31 of May 2012.

  3. This case comes from the experience of the second author.

  4. This case comes from the experience of the first author.

  5. In this section we do not provide the description of iPB which is done in Sect. 6. The main focus in this section is on how iPB is being used in the process and system development.

  6. Here, we follow the idea of (Box and Draper 1987), p. 424: “Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful” considering that that showing the usefulness for practical purposes as the best way to validate a model.

References

  • Adams MJ, Ter Hofstede AH, Edmond D, van der Aalst WM (2005) Facilitating flexibility and dynamic exception handling in workflows through worklets. In: CAiSE’05

  • Andersson T, Andersson-Ceder A, Bider I (2002) State flow as a way of analyzing business processes–case studies. Logist Inf Manag 15(1):34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson T, Bider I, Svensson R (2005) Aligning people to business processes experience report. Softw Proces Improv Pract 10(4):403–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, Kugeler M, Rosemann M (eds) (2011) Process management: a guide for the design of business processes. 2nd ed. Springer

  • Bider I (2014) Analysis of agile software development from the knowledge transformation perspective. In: Johansson B (ed) To appear in 13th international conference on perspectives in business informatics research (BIR 2014). Lund, Sweden. Springer, LNBIP

  • Bider I, Striy A (2008) Controlling business process instance flexibility via rules of planning. IJBPIM 3(1):15–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bider I, Johannesson P, Perjons E (2010) In search of the holy grail: integrating social software with BPM. Experience report. In: Enterprise, business-process and information systems modeling, LNBIP, Vol. 50. Springer, pp 1–13

  • Bider I, Bellinger G, Perjons E (2011) Modeling an agile enterprise: reconciling systems and process thinking. In: The practice of enterprise modeling, LNBIP, Vol. 92. Springer, pp 238–52

  • Bider I, Johannesson P, Perjons E, Johansson L (2012) Design science in action: developing a framework for introducing IT systems into operational practice. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information systems, ICIS. Orlando, Florida, US

  • Box GEP, Draper NR (1987) Empirical model building and response surfaces. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno G et al (2011) Key challenges for enabling agile BPM with social software. J Softw Maint Evol Res Pract 23(4):297–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conant R, Ashby R (1970) Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system. Int J Systems Sci 1(2):89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conboy K, Fitzgerald B (2004a) Toward a conceptual framework of agile methods: a study of agility in different disciplines. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM workshop on interdisciplinary software engineering research. Newport Beach. ACM, pp 37–44

  • Conboy K, Fitzgerald B (2004b) Toward a conceptual framework of agile methods. In: Extreme programming and agile methods-XP-agile universe 2004. Springer, pp 105–16

  • Fowler M, Highsmith J (2001) The agile manifesto. Softw Dev 9(8):28–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Gong Y, Janssen M (2011) From policy implementation to business process management: principles for creating flexibility and agility. Gov Inf Q 29:S61–S71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gram Consulting (2009) “Ba” for management development. http://gramconsulting.com/2009/04/ba-for-management-development/. Accessed 17 Aug 2013

  • Highsmith J, Orr K, Cockburn A (2000) E-business application delivery, pp 4–17. www.cutter.com/freestuff/ead0002.pdf

  • IbisSoft (2009) iPB reference manual. http://docs.ibissoft.se/node/3. Accessed 10 Aug 2013

  • Jalali A (2014) Assessing aspect oriented approaches in business process management. In: Johansson B (ed) To appear in 13th international conference on perspectives in business informatics research (BIR 2014). Lund, Sweden. Springer, LNBIP

  • Jalali A, Wohed P, Ouyang C (2012) Aspect oriented business process modelling with precedence. In: Business process model and notation, LNBIP, Vol. 125. Springer, pp 23–37

  • Jalali A, Wohed P, Ouyang C, Johannesson P (2013) Dynamic weaving in aspect oriented business process management. In: 21st international conference on COOPERATIVE INFORMATION SYSTEMS (CoopIS 2013). Springer, pp 2–20

  • Jensen K, Kristensen LM, Wells L (2007) Coloured petri nets and CPN tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf 9(3–4):213–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khomyakov M, Bider I (2001) Achieving workflow flexibility through taming the chaos. In: OOIS 2000—6th international conference on object oriented information systems. Springer, pp 85–92

  • Kiczales G et al (1997) Aspect-oriented programming. In: ECOOP’97—object-oriented programming. Jyväskylä. Springer, pp 220–242

  • Kindermann H (2013) Empowering process participants—the way to a truly agile business process management. http://www.onthemove-conferences.org/index.php/keynotes2013/2013keynotekindermann. Accessed 15 Aug 2013

  • Kueng P, Kawalek P (1997) Goal-based business process models: creation and evaluation. Bus Proces Manag J 3(1):17–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markovic I, Pereira AC (2008) Towards a formal framework for reuse in business process modeling. BPM 2007 workshops. Springer, Berlin, pp 484–495

    Google Scholar 

  • Meade LM, Sarkis J (2010) Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing processes: an analytical network approach. Int J Prod Res 37(2):241–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2011) Documents associated with business process model and notation (BPMN). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/. Accessed 16 Aug 2013

  • Perjons E, Bider I, Andersson B (2007) Building and exploiting a business process model for lobbying: experience report. Commun IIMA CIIMA 7(3):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesic M, Schonenberg H, Van der Aalst WMP (2007) DECLARE: full support for loosely-structured processes. In: EDOC

  • Raschke RL, David JS (2005) Business process agility. In: AMCIS 2005 Proceedings

  • Rosemann M, Recker J, Flender C (2008) Contextualization of business processes. Int J Bus Proc Integr Manag 47–60

  • Scholten DL (2010) Every good key must be a model of the lock it opens. http://www.goodregulatorproject.org/images/Every_Good_Key_Must_Be_A_Model_Of_The_Lock_It_Opens.pdf. Accessed 6 Aug 2013

  • Schonenberg H et al (2008) Towards a taxonomy of process flexibility. In: CAiSE forum

  • Seethamraju R, Seethamraju J (2009) Enterprise systems and business process agility—a case study. In: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 1–12

  • Sherehiy B, Karwowski W, Lawyer JK (2007) A review of enterprise agility: concepts, frameworks, and attributes. Int J Indus Ergonom 37:445–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore J, Warden S (2008) The art of agile, O’Reilly

  • Swenson KD (ed) (2010) Mastering the unpredictable: how adaptive case management will revolutionize the way that knowledge workers get things done. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiemich C, Puhlmann F (2013) An agile BPM project methodology. In: BPM conference

  • van der Aalst WMP (1998) The application of petri nets to workflow management. J Circuits Syst Comput 8(1):21–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst WMP (2005) Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl Eng 53:129–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst WM et al (2009) Flexibility as a service. In: Database systems for advanced applications. Springer, pp 319–33

  • van der Aalst WMP, Weijters AJMM (2004) Process mining: a research agenda. Comput Ind 53(3):231–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst WMP, ter Hofstede AHM, Kiepuszewski B, Barros AP (2003) Workflow patterns. Distrib Parallel Databases 14(1):5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weske M (2012) Business process management: concepts, languages, architectures. 2nd ed. Springer

  • YAWL Foundation (2004). YAWL http://www.yawlfoundation.org/. Accessed 18 Aug 2013

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to all members of our team without whose efforts this paper would have never been written. Special thanks to Tomas Andersson, Paul Johannesson, Erik Perjons, Rogier Svensson and Alexey Striy. The authors are also much in debt to the anonymous reviewers whose comments helped us to improve the structure and readability of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DSV - Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

    Ilia Bider & Amin Jalali

  2. IbisSoft AB, Stockholm, Sweden

    Ilia Bider

Authors
  1. Ilia Bider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amin Jalali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilia Bider.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bider, I., Jalali, A. Agile business process development: why, how and when—applying Nonaka’s theory of knowledge transformation to business process development. Inf Syst E-Bus Manage 14, 693–731 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-014-0256-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-014-0256-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation