Skip to main content
Book cover

Information Systems Action Research pp 277–310Cite as

A Test of the Communication Flow Optimization Model Through an Action Research Study at a Defense Contractor

  • Chapter

  • 1494 Accesses

Part of the Integrated Series in Information Systems book series (ISIS,volume 13)

Abstract

Operational-level approaches to process redesign have traditionally focused on “workflows”, or the chronological flows of activities in processes. It is argued in this chapter that while this makes some sense in materials-transformation processes, whose final product usually is a tangible manufactured item (e.g., a car engine), this orientation is fundamentally inconsistent with the communication-intensive nature of the vast majority of processes found in organizations today. This chapter shows, through an action research study, that a focus on communication flow representations and methods is likely to lead to better process redesign outcomes than a focus on representations and methods in connection with “workflows”. It does so by developing a set of research questions based on the communication flow optimization model, and answering those questions in the context provided by three process redesign projects facilitated by the researcher at a defense contractor in the US.

Key words

  • qualitative research
  • action research
  • data triangulation
  • process redesign
  • organizational communication
  • electronic communication

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-36060-7_12
  • Chapter length: 34 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-0-387-36060-7
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

9. References

  • Ang, C.L. & Gay, R.K.L. (1993). IDEF0 modeling for project risk assessment. Computers in Industry, 22(1), 31–46.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, R. & Bowker, P. (1995). BPR consulting: An evaluation of the methods employed. Business Process Re-Engineering & Management, 1(2), 28–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. & Schon, D.A. (1991). Participatory action research and action science compared. W.F. Whyte, ed. Participatory Action Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avison, D., Lau, F., Myers, M.D. & Nielsen, P. (1999). Action research. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 94–97.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bashein, B.J. & Markus, M.L. (1994). Preconditions for BPR success. Information Systems Management, 11(2), 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. (1997). Distinguishing action research from participative case studies. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 1(1), 25–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the AIS, 2(19), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. & Wood-Harper, T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of Information Technology, 11(3), 235–246.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. & Wood-Harper, T. (1998). Diversity in information systems action research methods. European Journal of Information Systems, 7(2), 90–107.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bergner, J.T. (1991). The New Superpowers: Germany, Japan, the US, and the New World Order. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, M. (2000). Enabling a successful e-business strategy requires a detailed business process map. InfoWorld, 22(10), 64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booch, G., Jacobson, I. & Rumbaugh, J. (1998). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, G. & Peppard, J. (Eds) (1995). Examining Business Process Re-engineering. London, UK: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burn, J. & Barnett, M. (1999). Communicating for advantage in the virtual organization. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(4), 215–222.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Buzacott, J.A. (1996). Commonalities in reengineered business processes: Models and issues. Management Science, 42(5), 768–782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caron, J.R., Jarvenpaa, S.L. & Stoddard, D.B. (1994). Business reengineering at CIGNA Corporation: Experiences and lessons learned from the first five years. MIS Quarterly, 18(3), 233–250.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Champy, J. (1995). Reengineering Management. New York, NY: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, W. (1991). Inventing Japan: The Making of a Postwar Civilization. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childe, S.J., Maull, R.S. & Benett, J. (1994). Frameworks for understanding business process re-engineering. International Journal of Operations & Productions Management, 14(12), 22–34.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, T.Y. (1995). Conceptualizing continuous improvement: Implications for organizational change. Omega, 23(6), 607–624.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, T.Y. & Behling, O.C. (1997). Top managers and TQM success: One more look after all these years. The Academy of Management Executive, 11(1), 37–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, T.Y. & Liker, J.K. (1995). Bringing Japanese continuous improvement approaches to U.S. manufacturing: The roles of process orientation and communications. Decision Sciences, 26(5), 589–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuang, T. & Yadav, S.B. (2000). A decision-driven approach to object-oriented analysis. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 31(2), 13–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemons, E.K., Thatcher, M.E., & Row, M.C. (1995). Identifying sources of reengineering failures: A study of the behavioral factors contributing to reengineering risks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(2), 9–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutterbuck, D., & Crainer, S. (1990). Makers of Management. London, England: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. (1993). Process Innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. (1993a). Need radical innovation and continuous improvement? Integrate process re-engineering and total quality management. Planning Review, 21(3), 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. (2000). Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. & Short, J.E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. & Stoddard, D.B. (1994). Reengineering: Business change of mythic proportions? MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 121–127.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, W.S. (1983). System Analysis and Design: A Structured Approach. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, D.L., Lee, J.D., Orwig, R.E., & Vogel, D.R. (1995). Technological support for group process modeling. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(3), 42–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of The Crisis. Cambridge, MA: Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. & Wixom, B.H. (2000). Systems Analysis and Design: An Applied Approach. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis A.R., Hayes G.S., & Daniels, R.M., Jr. (1999). Business process modeling with group support systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(4), 115–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P.F. (1989). The New Realities. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P.F. (1993). Professional’s productivity. Accross the Board, 30(9), 50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, M.J. (1994). The new and the old of business process redesign. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 3(1), 5–22.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Elden, M. & Chisholm, R.F. (1993). Emerging varieties of action research. Human Relations, 46(2), 121–141.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fingar, P., Aronica, R. & Maizlish, B. (2001). The Death of “e” and the Birth of the Real New Economy. Tampa, FL: Meghan-Kiffer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, W.M. (1990). An interview with Eric Trist, father of the sociotechnical systems approach. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 26(2), 259–279.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. (1977). Organizational Design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R.D. (1991). Choosing appropriate information system research approaches: A revised taxonomy. H. Nissen, H.K. Klein, & R. Hirschheim, eds. Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. New York, NY: North-Holland, pp. 327–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R.D. (1992). Choosing information systems research approaches. R. Galliers, ed. Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines. Boston, MA: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 144–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves, R.H. (2001). Seeking defense efficiency. Acquisition Review Quarterly, 8(3), 47–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover, V., Jeong, S.R., Kettinger, W.J., & Teng, J.T.C. (1995). The implementation of business process reengineering. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), 109–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. (1990). Reengineering work: Don’t automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 68(4), 104–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. (1996). Beyond Reengineering. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. (2000). Reengineering redux. CIO Magazine, 13(10), 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation. New York, NY: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. & Stanton, S.A. (1995). The Reengineering Revolution. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. & Stanton, S.A. (1997). The reengineering revolution. Government Executive, 27(9), 2–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, J.H. (1991). Business Process Improvement. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, J.H., Esseling, E.K.C. & Van Nimwegen, H. (1998). Business Process Improvement Workbook: Documentation, Analysis, Design, and Management of Business Process Improvement. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The Motivation to Work. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, V.D. (1996). Process Mapping: How to Reengineer your Business Processes. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishikawa, K. (1986). Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo, Japan: Asian Productivity Organisation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T.D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsonn, S. (1991). Action research. H. Nissen, H.K. Klein, & R. Hirschheim, eds. Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. New York, NY: North-Holland, 371–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juran, J. (1989). Juran on Leadership for Quality. New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzenstein, G. & Lerch, F.J. (2000). Beneath the surface of organizational processes: A social representation framework for business process redesign. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 18(4), 383–422.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kettinger, W.J. & Grover, V. (1995). Toward a theory of business change management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (1995). Process Reengineering, PROI: A Practical Methodology. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Editora Vozes (in Portuguese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (1999). Process Improvement and Organizational Learning: The Role of Collaboration Technologies. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (2001). Compensatory adaptation to a lean medium: An action research investigation of electronic communication in process improvement groups. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 44(4), 267–285.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (2002). Managing with web-based IT in mind. Communications of the ACM, 45(5), 102–106.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (2005). Business Process Improvement through E-Collaboration: Knowledge Sharing through the Use of Virtual Groups. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. & McQueen, R.J. (1996). Product flow, breadth and complexity of business processes: An empirical study of fifteen business processes in three organizations. Business Process Re-engineering & Management, 2(2), 8–22.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. & Murphy, F. (2001). Redesigning Acquisition Processes: A New Methodology Based on the Flow of Knowledge and Information. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Acquisition University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N., McQueen, R.J. & Corner, J.L. (1997). The nature of data, information and knowledge exchanges in business processes: Implications for process improvement and organizational learning. The Learning Organization, 4(2), 70–80.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lacity, M.C. & Janson, M.A. (1994). Understanding qualitative data: A framework of text analysis methods. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(2), 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, F. (1997). A review on the use of action research in information systems studies. A.S. Lee, J. Liebenau, & J.I. DeGross, eds. Information Systems and Qualitative Research. London, England: Chapman & Hall, 31–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledford, G.E. & Mohrman, S.A. (1993). Self-design for high involvement: A large-scale organizational change. Human Relations, 46(2), 143–173.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ledford, G.E. & Mohrman, S.A. (1993b). Looking backward and forward at action research. Human Relations, 46(11), 1349–1359.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. G.W. Lewin, ed. Resolving Social Conflicts. New York, NY: Harper & Row, 201–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maull, R.S., Weaver, A.M., Childe, S.J., Smart, P.A. & Bennett, J. (1995). Current issues in business process re-engineering. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 15(11), 37–52.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J.A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. London, England: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, E. (1945). The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Misterek, S.D., Dooley, K.J. & Anderson, J.C. (1992). Productivity as a performance measure. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 12(1), 29–45.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (2001). Advice for an action researcher. Information Technology & People, 14(1), 12–27.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M.D. (1997). Qualitative research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 241–242.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Olesen, K., & Myers, M.D. (1999). Trying to improve communication and collaboration with information technology: An action research project which failed. Information Technology & People, 12(4), 317–332.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. & Baroudi, J.J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ould, M.A. (1995). Business Processes: Modelling and Analysis for Re-engineering and Improvement. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M.Q. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M.Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, M. & Robinson, V. (1984). The origins and status of action research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 20(2), 113–124.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R. (1992). Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, R.N. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research. Human Relations, 23(6), 499–513.

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Reason, P. (1993). Sitting between appreciation and disappointment: A critique of the special edition of Human Relations on action research. Human Relations, 46(10), 1253–1270.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rigby, D. (1993). The secret history of process reengineering. Planning Review, 21(2), 24–27.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I. & Booch, G. (1998). The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. (1974). Maximizing the power of causal investigations: The modus operandi method. W.J. Popham, ed. Evaluation in Education: Current Applications. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 66–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. (1998). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, B. & Sommer, R. (1991). A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoddard, D.B. & Jarvenpaa, S.L. (1995). Business process redesign: Tactics for managing radical change. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), 81–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L. & Corbin, J.M. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.L & Corbin, J.M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sucham, J. & Hayzak, G. (2001). The communication characteristics of virtual teams: A case study. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 44(3), 174–186.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, F.W. (1885). A Piece Rate System. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York, NY: Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teng, J.T.C., Seung, R.J. & Grover, V. (1998). Profiling successful reengineering projects. Communications of the ACM, 41(6), 96–102.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Toffler, A. (1991). Powershift. New York, NY: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trist, E.L., Higgin, G.W., Pollock, A.E. & Murray, H.A. (1970). Sociotechnical systems. P.B. Smith, ed. Group Processes. Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books, 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truex, D.P., III (2001). Three issues concerning relevance in IS research: Epistemology, audience, and method. Communications of the AIS, 6(24), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. (1994). IT-enabled business transformation: From automation to business scope redefinition. Sloan Management Review, 35(2), 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, M. (1989). The Deming Management Method. London, England: Mercury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, M. (1991). Deming Management at Work. London, England: Mercury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring, S.P. (1991). Taylorism Transformed. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M International University, USA

    Ned Kock

Authors
  1. Ned Kock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A & M International University, Laredo, Texas, USA

    Ned Kock

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kock, N. (2007). A Test of the Communication Flow Optimization Model Through an Action Research Study at a Defense Contractor. In: Kock, N. (eds) Information Systems Action Research. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 13. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36060-7_12

Download citation