Business & Information Systems Engineering

, Volume 58, Issue 1, pp 31–42 | Cite as

The Impact of Process Visibility on Process Performance

A Multiple Case Study of Operations Control Centers in ITSM
Research Paper


Successful monitoring is essential for managing security-critical or business-critical processes. The paper seeks to understand and empirically evaluate benefits of the BPM use case “monitor” in the context of Operations Control Centers (OCCs). OCCs create visibility about critical events and statuses in very sensitive processes. In IT Service Management (ITSM) they support the event management process with real-time monitoring and event analysis of critical systems in complex system landscapes. This special focus of OCCs on visibility is a promising context to study fundamentals of process visibility. The paper develops a Process Monitoring Benefits Framework that draws on the Situation Awareness Theory and the Theory of Constraints. The authors conceptualize process visibility and suggest that it is positively related to process performance. A multiple case study in seven organizations is carried out to examine the framework and its propositions. The case study indicates that the impact of process visibility on process performance is mediated by the situation awareness of the process participants as well as the identification of bottlenecks in processes. Moreover, factors are identified that potentially influence process visibility outcome – namely continuous improvement culture, outsourcing quality, and maturity of the software tool used for monitoring.


BPM use case monitor Process visibility Continuous improvement Situation awareness ITSM event management 

Supplementary material

12599_2015_414_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (241 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 241 kb)


  1. Barratt M, Oke A (2007) Antecedents of supply chain visibility in retail supply chains: a resource-based theory perspective. J Oper Manag 25(6):1217–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berner M, Graupner E, Maedche A, Mueller B (2012) Process visibility – towards a conceptualization and research themes. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2012), pp 1–13Google Scholar
  3. Cater-Steel A, McBride N (2007) IT service management improvement – actor network perspective. In: ECIS 2007 Proceedings. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2007), pp 1202–1213Google Scholar
  4. Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  5. Cotteleer MJ, Bendoly E (2006) Order lead-time improvement following enterprise information technology implementation: an empirical study. MIS Q 30(3):643–660Google Scholar
  6. Davenport TH (1993) Process innovation: reengineering work through information technology. Havard Business School Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. de Morais RM, Kazan S, de Pádua SID, Costa AL (2014) An analysis of BPM lifecycles: from a literature review to a framework proposal. Bus Process Manag J 20(3):412–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeLone WH, McLean ER (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manag Inf Syst 19(4):9–30Google Scholar
  9. Dibbern J, Winkler J, Heinzl A (2008) Explaning variations in client extra costs between software projects offshored to India. MIS Q 32(2):333–366Google Scholar
  10. Dubé L, Paré G (2003) Rigor in information systems positivist case research: current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Q 27(4):597–635Google Scholar
  11. EMC (2012) EMC Ionix ControlCenter. Accessed 20 Oct 2015
  12. Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. J Hum Factors 37(1):32–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galup SD, Dattero R (2010) A five-step method to tune your ITSM processes. Inf Syst Manag 27(2):156–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gartner (2012) Gartner says intelligent business operations is the next step for BPM programs. Accessed 20 Oct 2015
  15. Goldratt E, Cox J (1992) The goal: a process of ongoing improvement, 2nd edn. North River, Great BarringtonGoogle Scholar
  16. Graupner E, Berner M, Maedche A, Jegadeesan H (2014) Assessing the need for visibility of business processes – a process visibility fit framework. In: Proceedings of Business Process Management Conference BPM 2014. Springer LNCS 8659, pp 384–392Google Scholar
  17. Hogg DN, Folles K, Strand-Volden F, Torralba B (1995) Development of a situation awareness measure to evaluate advanced alarm systems in nuclear power plant control rooms. Ergonomics 38(11):2394–2413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holsti OR (1969) Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  19. Iden J, Eikebrokk TR (2013) Implementing IT service management: a systematic literature review. Int J Inf Manag 33(3):512–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kassarjian HH (1977) Content analysis in consumer research. J Consum Res 4(1):8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klotz L, Horman M, Bi HH, Bechtel J (2008) The impact of process mapping on transparency. Int J Product Perform Manag 57(8):623–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Manyika J, Chui M, Brown B et al (2011) Big data: the next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  23. Martinez H (2009) How much does downtime really cost? InfoManagement Direct, August 6, 2009. Accessed 20 Oct 2015
  24. McCombs BL, Marzano RJ (1990) Putting the self in self-regulated learning: the self as agent in integrating will and skill. Educ Psychol 25(1):51–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V (2004) Information technology and organizational performance: an integrative model of IT business value. MIS Q 28(2):283–322Google Scholar
  26. Myers MD, Newman M (2007) The qualitative interview in IS research: examining the craft. Inf Organ 17(1):2–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nelson RR, Todd PA, Wixom BH (2005) Antecedents of information and system quality: an empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. J Manag Inf Syst 21(4):199–235Google Scholar
  28. O’Brien KS, O’Harea D (2007) Situational awareness ability and cognitive skills training in a complex real-world task. Ergonomics 50(7):1064–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. OGC (2007a) ITIL Service strategy, Version 3. Office of Government Commerce, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. OGC (2007b) Continual service improvement, Version 3. Office of Government Commerce, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Pidun T, Buder J, Felden C (2011) Optimizing process performance visibility through additional descriptive features in performance measurement. In: 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops. IEEE Computer Society, pp 204–212Google Scholar
  32. Ray G, Muhanna WA, Barney JB (2005) Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: a resource-based analysis. MIS Q 29(4):625–652Google Scholar
  33. Russom P (2013) Operational intelligence: real-time business analytics from big data. TDWI Checkl Rep 1–8Google Scholar
  34. Schein EH (2004) Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  35. Shingo S (1989) A study of the Toyota production system from an industrial engineering viewpoint. Productivity Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Swaminathan MJ, Tayur SR (2003) Models for supply chains in e-business. Manag Sci 49(10):1387–1406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tetlay A, John P (2009) Determining the lines of system maturity, system readiness and capability readiness in the system development lifecycle. In: 7th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER 2009), pp 1–8Google Scholar
  38. van der Aalst WMP (2013) Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw Eng 2013:1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Womack JP, Jones DT (2003) Lean thinking: banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu J, Benbasat I, Cenfetelli RT (2013) Integrating service quality with system and information quality: an empirical test in the e-service context. MIS Q 37(3):777–794Google Scholar
  41. Yin RK (2003) Case study research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Berner
    • 1
  • Jino Augustine
    • 1
  • Alexander Maedche
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Enterprise Systems (InES)University of MannheimMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Information Systems and Marketing (IISM)Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations