Advertisement

A Human-Oriented Tuning of Workflow Management Systems

  • Irene Vanderfeesten
  • Hajo A. Reijers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3649)

Abstract

Workflow Management Systems (WfMS’s) offer a tremendous potential for organizations. Shorter lead times, less mistakes in work handoffs, and a better insight into process execution are some of the most notable advantages experienced in practice. At the same time, the introduction of these systems on the work floor undoubtedly brings great changes in the way that professionals work. If a WfMS’s work coordination is experienced as too rigid or mechanistic, this may negatively affect employees’ motivation, performance and satisfaction. In this paper, we propose a set of measures to “tune” functioning workflow systems and minimize such effects. The measures we propose do not require undue cost, time, or organizational changes, as they characteristically lie within the configuration options of a WfMS. We have asked an expert panel to select and validate the 6 most promising measures, which we present in this paper. From our evaluation of three commercial WfMS’s, we conclude that it depends on the specific system to what level these general measures can be easily implemented.

Keywords

Business Process Management Work Item Assignment Policy Promising Measure Skill Variety 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bowers, J., Button, G., Sharrock, W.: Workflow From Within and Without: Technology and Cooperative Work on the Print Industry Shopfloor. In: Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 51–66 (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caine, C.T., Lauer, T.W., Peacock, E.: The T1-Auto Inc. production part testing (PPT) process: A workflow automation success story. Annals of Cases on Information Technology 5, 74–87 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caro, J.L., Guevara, A., Aguayo, A.: Workflow: A solution for cooperative information system development. Business Process Management Journal 9(2), 208–220 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cook, T.D., Campbell, D.T.: Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Rand McNally (1979)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dourish, P.: Process descriptions as organizational accounting devices: the dual use of workflow technologies. In: Ellis, C.A., Zigurs, I. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM 2001 Int. Conference on Supporting Group Work, pp. 52–60. ACM Press, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis, C.A.: Information control nets: a mathematical model of office information flow. In: Roth, P.F., Nutt, G.J. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Simulation, Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pp. 225–240. ACM Press, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ellis, C.A., Wainer, J.: Goal-based Models of Collaboration. Collaborative Computing 1, 61–86 (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fried, Y.: Meta-Analytical Comparison of the Job Diagnostic Survey and Job Chracteristcs Inventory as Correlates of Work Satisfaction and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 76(5), 690–697 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R.: Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology 60, 159–170 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R.: Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 15, 250–279 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hackman, J.R., Suttle, J.L.: Improving Life at Work: Behavioral Science Approaches to Organizational Change. Goodyear Publishing (1977)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Herrmann, T., Hoffmann, M.: Augmenting Self-Controlled Work Allocation in Workflow-Managmenet-Applications. In: Proceedings of HCI 1999, pp. 288–292 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herrmann, T.: Evolving Workflows by User-driven Coordination. In: Reichwald, R., Schlichter, J. (eds.) Verteiltes Arbeiten - Arbeiten der Zukunft. Tagingsband D-CSCW, pp. 103–114 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoffmann, M., Loser, K.-U.: Mitarbeiter-orientierte Modellierung und Planung von Geschäftsprozessen bie der Einführung von Workflow-Management. In: Proceedings of EMISA-Fachgruppentreffens 1997, pp. 39–57 (1997) (In German)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoffmann, M., Löffeler, T., Schmidt, Y.: Flexible Arbeitsverteilung mit Workflow-Management-Systemen. In: Herrmann, T., Scheer, A.-W., Weber, H. (eds.) Verbesserung von Geschäftsprozessen mit flexiblen Workflow-Management-Systemen, pp. 135–159. Physica, Heidelberg (1999) (In German). Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holman, D., Clegg, C., Waterson, P.: Navigating the territory of job design. Applied Ergonomics 33, 197–205 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iaffaldano, M.T., Muchinsky, P.M.: Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin 97(2), 251–273 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    IDS Scheer. ARIS Process Performance Manager (ARIS PPM). Presentation and whitepaper (2004), http://www.ids-scheer.de/PPM/
  19. 19.
    Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow Management: Modeling Concepts, Architecture, and Implementation. Int. Thomson Computer Press, London (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E., Patton, G.K.: The Job Satisfaction - Job Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Psychological Bulletin 127(3), 376–407 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Judge, T.A., Heller, D., Mount, M.K.: Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 87(3), 530–541 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Judge, T.A., Ilies, R.: Relationship of Personality to Performance Motivation.: A Meta-Analytical Review. Journal of Applied Psychology 87(4), 797–807 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Klein, M., Dellarocas, C., Bernstein, A.: Introduction to the Special Issue on Adaptive Workflow Systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 9(3,4), 265–267 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Küng, P.: The Effects of Workflow Systems on Organizations: A Qualitative Study. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 301–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Küng, P., Hagen, C.: Increased performance through business process management: an experience report from a swiss bank. In: Neely, A., et al. (eds.) Performance Measurement and Management - Public and Private, Cranfield, pp. 1–8 (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ley GmbH. COSA 4, User’s Guide, 2002 and Business-Process Designer’s Guide (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maslow, A.H.: A theory of human motivation. Psychological review 50, 370–396 (1943)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Muehlen, M.z.: Organizational Management in Workflow Applications - Issues and Perspectives. Information Technology and Management Journal 5(3), 271–291 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Orlikowski, W.: The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations. Organization Science 3(3), 398–427 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    van Ouwerkerk, R.J., Meijman, T.F., Mulder, G.: Industrial Psychological Task Analysis. Lemma, Utrecht (1994) (In Dutch)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Athena, P.: Administrator Guide, Designer’s Guide, User Guide FLOWer 3.0. Pallas Athena, the Netherlands (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Poelmans, S.: Making Workflow Systems Work: An Investigation into the Importance of Task-appropriation Fit, End-user Support and other Technological Characteristics. Ph.D. thesis. Doctoral dissertation series Faculty of Economic and Applied Economic Sciences nr 161, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reijers, H.A., Rigter, J.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The Case Handling Case. Int. Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 12(3), 365–391 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Robbins, S.P.: Organizational behavior. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2001)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Saal, F.E., Knight, P.A.: Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, California (1995)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Staffware. Staffware Process Suite, Using the Staffware Process Client, Issue 2, and Defining Staffware Procedures, Issue 2 (2002)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Workflow Management Coalition. WFMC Home Page: The Workflow Reference Model, WFMC-TC-1003 (1995), http://www.wfmc.org
  38. 38.
    Wintergreen. Business process management (BPM) market opportunities, strategies, and forecasts, 2003 to 2008. Lexington: WinterGreen Research (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irene Vanderfeesten
    • 1
  • Hajo A. Reijers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Technology ManagementEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations