Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Design it like Darwin - A value-based application of evolutionary algorithms for proper and unambiguous business process redesign

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Business process management (BPM) is an acknowledged source of corporate performance. Despite the mature body of knowledge, computational support is considered as a highly relevant research gap for redesigning business processes. Therefore, this paper applies Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) that, on a conceptual level, mimic the BPM lifecycle – the most popular BPM approach – by incrementally improving the status quo and bridging the trade-off between maintaining well-performing design structures and continuously evolving new designs. Beginning with describing process elements and their characteristics in matrices to aggregate process information, the EA then processes this information and combines the elements to new designs. These designs are then assessed by a function from value-based management. This economic paradigm reduces designs to their value contributions and facilitates an objective prioritization. Altogether, our triad of management science, BPM and information systems research results in a promising tool for process redesign and avoids subjective vagueness inherent to current redesign projects.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham, A. (2005). Evolutionary computation. In P. H. Sydenham & R. Thorn (Eds.), Handbook of measuring system design. Chichester: Wiley..

    Google Scholar 

  • Afflerbach, P., Kastner, G., Krause, F., & Röglinger, M. (2014). The business value of process flexibility. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 203–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when You’re having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, A., Klein, M., & Malone, T. W. (2003). The process recombinator: A tool for generating new business process ideas. 403–422. In T. W. Malone, K. Crowston, & G. A. Herman (Eds.), Organizing business knowledge: The MIT process handbook. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolsinger, M. (2015). Bringing value-based business process management to the operational process level. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 13(2), 355–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolsinger, M., Elsäßer, A., Helm, C., & Röglinger, M. (2015). Process improvement through economically driven routing of instances. Business Process Management Journal, 21(2), 353–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhl, H. U., Röglinger, M., Stöckl, S., & Braunwarth, K. S. (2011). Value orientation in process management. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 3(3), 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copeland, T. E., Koller, T., & Murrin, J. (1994). Valuation: Measuring and managing the value of companies (Wiley frontiers in finance). New York: Wiley.

  • Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for determining the value of any asset (3rd ed. Wiley finance series). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, M. G., Heck, J. L., & Shaffer, D. R. (2008). Shareholder theory - how opponents and proponents both get it wrong. Journal of Applied Finance, 18(2), 62–66.

  • Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (1st ed.). London: John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, K. A. (2006). Evolutionary computation: A unified approach (a Bradford book). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doomun, R., & Vunka Jungum, N. (2008). Business process modelling, simulation and reengineering: call centres. Business Process Management Journal, 14(6), 838–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. A. (2013). Fundamentals of business process management. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fogel, L. J., Owens, A. J., & Walsh, M. J. (1966). Artificial intelligence through simulated evolution. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franz, P. H., Kirchmer, M., & Rosemann, M. (2011). Value-driven business process management: Impact and benefits. https://www.accenture.com/mx-es/~/media/Accenture/Conversion-Assets/DotCom/Documents/Local/es-la/PDF2/Accenture-Value-Driven-Business-Process-Management.pdf. Accessed 16 September 2016.

  • Hammer, M. (2015). What is Business Process Management? In J. v. Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on business process management 1 (2nd ed., pp. 3–16). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto for business revolution. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, P., & Wolf, C. (2014). The state of business process management 2014. Business Process Trends. http://www.bptrends.com/bpt/wp-content/uploads/BPTrends-State-of-BPM-Survey-Report.pdf. Accessed 3 February 2016.

  • Hevner, Alan R.; March, Salvatore T.; Park, Jinsoo; Ram, Sudha (2004): Design science in information systems research. In: MIS Quarterly 28 (1), S. 75–105.

  • Hofacker, I., & Vetschera, R. (2001). Algorithmical approaches to business process design. Computers & Operations Research, 28(13), 1253–1275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1992). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: An introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence (1st ed. Complex adaptive systems). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (2001). Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1–3), 349–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (2003). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T., & Guha, S. (1997). Business process change: a study of methodologies, techniques, and tools. MIS Quarterly, 21(1), 55–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlbacher, M., & Reijers, H. A. (2013). The effects of process-oriented organizational design on firm performance. Business Process Management Journal, 19(2), 245–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koller, T., Goedhart, M., & Wessels, D. (2015). Valuation: measuring and managing the value of companies (6th ed. Wiley Finance). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1992). Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection(Complex adaptive systems). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leyer, M., Heckl, D., & Moormann, J. (2015). Process Performance Measurement. In J. v. Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on business process management 2 (2nd ed., pp. 227–241). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Limam Mansar, S., Reijers, H. A., & Ounnar, F. (2009). Development of a decision-making strategy to improve the efficiency of BPR. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 3248–3262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linhart, A., Manderscheid, J., & Roeglinger, M. (2015a). Roadmap to flexible service processes - a project portfolio selection and scheduling approach Germany, May 26–29, 2015. In J. Becker, J. vom Brocke, & M. de Marco (Eds.), ECIS 2015 Proceedings, Münster, Germany, 26.-29.5.2015 .

  • Linhart, A., Manderscheid, J., Roeglinger, M., & Schlott, H. (2015b). Process Improvement Roadmapping - How to Max Out Your Process. In T. Carte, A. Heinzl, & C. Urquhart (Eds.), ICIS 2015 Proceedings, Fort Worth, Texas, USA, 13.-16.12.2015 : Association for Information Systems.

  • Low, W. Z., de Weerdt, J, Wynn, M. T., ter Hofstede, A. H. M., van der Aalst, W. M., & vanden Broucke, S. (2014). Perturbing event logs to identify cost reduction opportunities: A genetic algorithm-based approach. In CEC 2014 Proceedings, Beijing, China (pp. 2428–2435).

  • March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, Salvatore T.; Storey, Veda C. (2008): Design science in the information systems discipline. An introduction to the special issue on design science research. In: MIS Quarterly 32 (4), S. 725–730.

  • Mendel, G. (1866). Experiments on Plant Hybridization. In Proceedings of the Natural History Society of Brünn (pp. 3–47, Vol. 4). Brünn.

  • Min, D. M., Kim, J. R., Kim, W. C., Min, D., & Ku, S. (1996). IBRS: Intelligent bank reengineering system. Decision Support Systems, 18(1), 97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neiger, D., & Churilov, L. (2004a). Goal-oriented business process engineering revisited: a unifying perspective. In ICEIS 2004 Proceedings, Porto, Portugal (pp. 149–163).

  • Neiger, D., & Churilov, L. (2004b). Goal-oriented business process modeling with EPCs and value-focused thinking. In T. Kanade, J. Kittler, J. M. Kleinberg, F. Mattern, J. C. Mitchell, M. Naor, et al. (Eds.), Business Process Management Vol. 3080, pp. 98–115, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

  • Nissen, M. E. (1998). Redesigning reengineering through measurement-driven inference. MIS Quarterly, 22(4), 509–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissen, M. E. (2000). An intelligent tool for process redesign: manufacturing supply-chain applications. International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 12(4), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R., & Venable, J. R. (2008). Strategies for Design Science Research Evaluation Ireland, 2008. In W. Golden, T. Acton, K. Conboy, H. van der Heijden, & V. K. Tuunainen (Eds.), ECIS 2008 Proceedings, Galway, Ireland (Paper 87).

  • Rappaport, A. (1986). Creating shareholder value: A guide for managers and investors. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rechenberg, I. (1973). Evolutionsstrategie: Optimierung technischer Systeme nach Prinzipien der biologischen Evolution (Problemata) (Vol. 15). Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reijers, H. A., & Limam Mansar, S. (2005). Best practices in business process redesign: an overview and qualitative evaluation of successful redesign heuristics. Omega, 33(4), 283–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter-Von Hagen, C., Ratz, D., & Povalej, R. (2005). A Genetic Algorithm Approach to Self-Organizing Knowledge Intensive Processes. In i-know ‘05 Proceedings, Graz, Austria (pp. 357–364).

  • Rotaru, K., Wilkin, C., Churilov, L., Neiger, D., & Ceglowski, A. (2011). Formalizing process-based risk with value-focused process engineering. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 9(4), 447–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutkowski, L. (2008). Computational intelligence. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schwefel, H.-P. (1977). Numerische Optimierung von Computer-Modellen mittels der Evolutionsstrategie. Basel: Birkhäuser Basel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, A., & McDermott, P. (2008). Workflow modeling: Tools for process improvement and applications development (2nd ed.). Boston: Artech House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siddique, N., & Adeli, H. (2013). Computational intelligence: Synergies of fuzzy logic, neural networks, and evolutionary computing. Chichester: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnenberg, C., & vom Brocke, J. (2012). Evaluation Patterns for Design Science Research Artefacts. In M. Helfert & B. Donnellan (Eds.), Practical aspects of design science, Communications in Computer and Information Science (Vol. 286, pp. 71–83). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, G. B., & Stern, J. M. (1991). The quest for value: A guide for senior managers. New York: HarperBusiness.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valiris, G., & Glykas, M. (1999). Critical review of existing BPR methodologies. Business Process Management Journal, 5(1), 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Aalst, W. M. (2013). Business Process Management: A Comprehensive Survey. ISRN Software Engineering, Volume 2013.

  • Vanwersch, R. J. B., Vanderfeesten, I., Rietzschel, E., & Reijers, H. A. (2015). Improving Business Processes: Does Anybody have an Idea? In H. R. Motahari-Nezhad, J. Recker, & M. Weidlich (Eds.), Business Process Management (Vol. 9253, pp. 3–18, Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

  • Vanwersch, R. J. B., Shahzad, K., Vanderfeesten, I., Vanhaecht, K., Grefen, P., Pintelon, L., et al. (2016). A critical evaluation and framework of business process improvement methods. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 58(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2012). A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research. In D. Hutchison, T. Kanade, J. Kittler, J. M. Kleinberg, F. Mattern, J. C. Mitchell, et al. (Eds.), Design science research in information systems. Advances in theory and practice (Vol. 7286, pp. 423–438, Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

  • Vergidis, K., Tiwari, A., Majeed, B., & Roy, R. (2007). Optimisation of business process designs: an algorithmic approach with multiple objectives. International Journal of Production Economics, 109(1–2), 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergidis, K., Tiwari, A., & Majeed, B. (2008). Business process analysis and optimization: beyond reengineering. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 38(1), 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vergidis, K., Saxena, D., & Tiwari, A. (2012). An evolutionary multi-objective framework for business process optimisation. Applied Soft Computing, 12(8), 2638–2653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vom Brocke, J., & Sonnenberg, C. (2015). Value-orientation in business process management. In J. v. Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on business process management 2 (2nd ed., pp. 101–132). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vom Brocke, J., Recker, J., & Mendling, J. (2010). Value-oriented process modeling: integrating financial perspectives into business process re-design. Business Process Management Journal, 16(2), 333–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wastell, D. G., White, P., & Kawalek, P. (1994). A methodology for business process redesign: experiences and issues. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 3(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellner, G. (2011). A structured evaluation of business process improvement approaches. Business Process Management Journal, 17(2), 203–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, Y., & Chen, Y. (2003). Project-oriented business process performance optimization. In SMC ‘03 Proceedings, Washington, DC, USA (pp. 4079–4084).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Project Group Business & Information Systems Engineering of the Fraunhofer FIT, Universitaetsstrasse 12, 86159, Augsburg, Germany

    Patrick Afflerbach

  2. Research Center Finance & Information Management, University of Augsburg, Universitaetsstrasse 12, 86159, Augsburg, Germany

    Martin Hohendorf & Jonas Manderscheid

Authors
  1. Patrick Afflerbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Hohendorf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonas Manderscheid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonas Manderscheid.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Afflerbach, P., Hohendorf, M. & Manderscheid, J. Design it like Darwin - A value-based application of evolutionary algorithms for proper and unambiguous business process redesign. Inf Syst Front 19, 1101–1121 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-016-9715-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-016-9715-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation