Developing the Business Process Management Performance of an Information System Using the Delphi Study Technique

  • Hisham AbouGradEmail author
  • Jon Warwick
  • Amare Desta
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 532)


Information systems are used to manage an organisation’s business process management (BPM), its operations and performance. Thus, organisations will benefit from systematic processes for evaluating their business information systems with the aim of developing BPM and business information systems performance. The Delphi Study Technique (DST) is a structured business study technique that can be used as a systematic and interactive assessment process based on controlled feedback from business experts, professionals, or others with relevant experience. The Delphi study technique (also known as the Delphi method) has produced significant achievements in evaluating and improving BPM through identifying BPM values to be used as key indicators. This paper describes the essential stages for measuring the performance of an information system by combining the Delphi method and BPM values to improve an organisation’s business performance. The paper provides examples of the use of DST and discusses empirical results from the published literature.


Business process management Decision development technique Delphi method Delphi study technique Information systems performance 


  1. 1.
    N. Dalkey, O. Helmer, An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag. Sci. 9(3), 458–467 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Đ. Quyên, Developing university governance indicators and their weighting system using a modified Delphi method. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 141, 828–833 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Nworie, Using the Delphi technique in educational technology research. TechTrends 55(5), 24–30 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Schmiedel, J. vom Brocke, J. Recker, Development and validation of an instrument to measure organizational cultures’ support of Business Process Management. Inf. Manag. 51(1), 43–56 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Becker, J. vom Brocke, M. Heddier, S. Seidel, In search of information systems (grand) challenges. Bus. Inf. Sys. Eng. 57(6), 377–390 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    O. Thomas, J.A. vom Brocke, Value-driven approach to the design of service-oriented information systems–making use of conceptual models. IseB 8(1), 67–97 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Looy, M. Backer, G. Poels, Towards a Decision Tool for Choosing a Business Process Maturity Model, DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol 7286 (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2012), pp. 78–87Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Schmiedel, J. vom Brocke, J. Recker, Which cultural values matter to business process management? Results from a global Delphi study. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 19(2), 292–317 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    O. Müller, T. Schmiedel, E. Gorbacheva, J. vom Brocke, Toward a typology of business process management professionals: identifying patterns of competence through latent semantic analysis. Enterprise Inf. Sys. 10(1), 50–80 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Pangsri, Application of the multi criteria decision making methods for project selection. Univers. J. Manage. 3(1), 15–20 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    C. Sonnenberg, J. vom Brocke, The missing link between BPM and accounting. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 20(2), 213–246 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. vom Brocke, A. Simons, A. Cleven, Towards a business process-oriented approach to enterprise content management: the ECM-blueprinting framework. Inf. Sys. e-Bus. Manage. J. 9(4), 475–496 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. García, J. Vanderdonckt, C. Lemaige, J. Calleros, in How to Describe Workflow Information Systems to Support Business Process. 10th IEEE Conference on E-Commerce Technology and the Fifth IEEE Conference on Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce and E-Services (IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, 2008), pp. 404–411Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Draghici, A. Popescua, L. Gogan, A proposed model for monitoring organizational performance. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 124, 544–551 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Kohlbacher, H. Reijers, The effects of process-oriented organizational design on firm performance. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 19(2), 245–262 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business, London South Bank UniversityLondonUK

Personalised recommendations