Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating a Forward-Looking Maturity Model for Enterprise Performance Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Engineering the Transformation of the Enterprise

  • 1271 Accesses

Abstract

Enterprise performance management (EPM) helps in executing a company’s strategy. As current benchmarking approaches against the so-called “first quartile” are backward-looking and, thus, fail to capture the disruptive nature of digital technologies, a new zero-quartile benchmarking compares companies against the expected (collectively deemed best possible) state. However, its relevance was not yet demonstrated. Therefore, the objective of this article is to evaluate this new zero-quartile benchmarking approach with the help of a case study at a global supplier of natural ingredients and nutrition solutions which currently improves their EPM by leveraging digital technologies. We subsume our findings towards digital EPM as follows: (1) From playground to pitch: It is not easy to implement a digital enterprise platform. However, it should be a company’s future single source of truth. (2) Powering up a company’s crystal ball: Leveraging predictive analytics, companies should rethink their budgeting and forecasting. (3) Setting the scene: Companies should continue harmonizing their ERP while automating their standard reporting and analysis using finance bots.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Fletcher, G., Griffiths, M.: Digital transformation during a lockdown. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 55, 102–185 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bhutta, K.S., Huq, F.: Benchmarking – best practices: an integrated approach. Benchmarking. 6(3), 254–268 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Joo, S.-J., Nixon, D., Stoeberl, P.A.: Benchmarking with data envelopment analysis: a return on asset perspective. Benchmarking. 18(4), 529–542 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chanias, S., Hess, T.: How digital are we? Maturity models for the assessment of a company’s status in the digital transformation. Management Report/Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik und Neue Medien. 2016(2), 1–14 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Esswein, M., Mayer, J.H., Stoffel, S., Quick, R.: Predictive analytics – a modern crystal ball? Answers from a case study. In: Johannesson, P., Ågerfalk, P., Helms, R. (eds.) Information Systems for a Sharing Society. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS, 2019), Stockholm and Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  6. de Bruin, T., Freeze, R., Kulkarni, U., Rosemann, M.: Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: Proceedings of the 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS, 2005), Sydney, Australia, pp. 8–19

    Google Scholar 

  7. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Gengler, C.E., Rossi, M., Hui, W., Virtanen, V., Bragge, J.: The design science research process: a model for producing and presenting information systems research. In: First International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST, 2006), Claremont, CA, pp. 83–106

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S. (eds.): Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol. 22. Springer Science+Business Media LLC, Boston, MA (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Straub, D., Ang, S.: Editor’s Comments: Rigor and relevance in IS research: redefining the debate for future research. MIS Q. 35(1), iii (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Prat, N., Comyn-Wattiau, I., Akoka, J.: Artifact evaluation in information systems design-science research – a holistic view. In: Proceedings of the 19th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS, 2014), Chengdu, China, pp. 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mayer, J.H., Göbel, M., Esswein, M., Quick, R.: Getting Digital Technologies Right – A Forward-Looking Maturity Model For Enterprise Performance Management. In: Cuel, R., Winter, R. (eds.) Digital Resilience and Sustainability: People, Organizations, and Society. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Conference of the Italian chapter of (ItAIS), pp. 1–14. Trento, Italy (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Simon, H.A.: The Science of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R., El Sawy, O.A.: Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Inf. Syst. Res. 3(1), 36–59 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. vom Brocke, J., Winter, R., Hevner, A., Maedche, A.: Accumulation and evolution of design knowledge in design science research – a journey through time and space. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 21(3), 520–544 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q. 37(2), 337–355 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Webster, J., Watson, R.T.: Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Q. 26(2), xiii–xxiii (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  18. AIS: Senior Scholar’s Basket of Journals. https://aisnet.org/page/SeniorScholarBasket (2020). Accessed 14 July 2020

  19. SJR: Scimago Journal & Country Rank. https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php ?area=1400&category=1402 (2020). Accessed 6 June 2021

  20. AIS: Conferences. https://aisnet.org/page/Conferences (2020). Accessed 14 July 2020

  21. Alturki, A., Gable, G.G., Bandara, W.: The design science research roadmap: in progress evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 18th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS, 2013), Jeju Island, Korea, pp. 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schmaus, P.A.: Peer group benchmarking for the relative performance evaluation of companies. University of St Gallen, Business Dissertations, p. 128. Epubli GmbH, Berlin (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Myers, M.D.: Qualitative research in information systems. MIS Q. 21(2) (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ahmad, M., Botzkowski, T., Klötzer, C., Papert, M.: Behind the blackbox of digital business models. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS, 2020), Wailea, HI, pp. 4547–4557

    Google Scholar 

  25. LaValle, S., Lesser, E., Shockley, R., Hopkins, M.S., Kruschwitz, N.: Big data, analytics and the path from insights to value. Reprint Number 52205. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 52(2), 21–31 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Spendolini, M.J.: The benchmarking process. Compensation Benefits Rev. 24(5), 21–29 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hess, T., Benlian, A., Matt, C., Wiesböck, F.: Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MISQE. 15(2), 123–139 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pinto, J.L.: Assessing the relationship between bpm maturity and the success of organizations, NOVA Information Management School (NIMS, 2020)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sjödin, D.R., Parida, V., Leksell, M., Petrovic, A.: Smart factory implementation and process innovation. Res. Technol. Manag. 61(5), 22–31 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kane, G.C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A.N., Kiron, D., Buckley, N.: Achieving digital maturity: adapting your company to a changing world. Reprint Number 59180. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 59(1), 21–31 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Plaschke, F., Seth, I., Rob, W.: Bots, algorithms, and the future of the finance function. McKinsey Financ. 65, 18–23 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Accenture: From bottom line to front line. https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/pdf-85/accenture-cfo-research-global.pdf (2020). Accessed 9 June 2021

  33. Lucas, S.: The Benefits of the SAP Digital Enterprise Platform. https://blogs.saphana.com/2016/02/03/the-benefits-of-the-sap-digital-enterprise-platform/ (2016). Accessed 9 June 2021

  34. Lasrado, L.A., Vatrapu, R., Andersen, K.N.: Maturity models development in IS research: a literature review. In: Selected Papers of the Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia (IRIS, 2015), Oulu, Finland, pp. 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  35. Williams, C., Boardman, L., Lang, K., Schallmo, D.: Digital maturity models for small and medium-sized enterprises: a systematic literature review. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM, 2019), Florence, Italy, pp. 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  36. Leem, C.S., Wan Kim, B., Jung Yu, E., Ho Paek, M.: Information technology maturity stages and enterprise benchmarking: an empirical study. Indus. Manag. Data Syst. 108(9), 1200–1218 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis. Support Syst. 15(4), 251–266 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sonnenberg, C., vom Brocke, J.: Evaluation Patterns for Design Science Research Artefacts. European Design Science Symposium, vol. 286, pp. 71–83. Springer (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Venable, J., Pries-Heje, B.J., Baskerville, J., Baskerville, R.: A comprehensive framework for evaluation in design science research. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST, 2012), Las Vegas, NV, pp. 423–438

    Google Scholar 

  40. Teddlie, C., Tashakkori, A.: Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. SAGE, Los Angeles (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  41. North Data: Döhler Group SE, Darmstadt. https://www.northdata.de/D%C3%B6hler+Group+SE,+Darmstadt/HRB+95005 (2020). Accessed 9 June 2021

  42. Imgrund, F., Fischer, M., Janiesch, C., Winkelmann, A.: Approaching digitalization with business process management. In: Proceedings of the 26th Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik (MKWI, 2018), Ilmenau, Germany, pp. 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  43. Berger, S., Bitzer, M., Häckel, B., Voit, C.: Approaching digital transformation – Development of a multi-dimensional Maturity Model. In: Proceedings of the 28th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS, 2020), Marrakech, Morocco, pp. 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  44. Eremina, Y., Lace, N., Bistrova, J.: Digital maturity and corporate performance: the case of the Baltic States. JOItmC. 5(3), 54 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: FEDS: a framework for evaluation in design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 25(1), 77–89 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Darmstadt University of Technology, Darmstadt, Germany

    Jörg H. Mayer, Markus Esswein, Moritz Göbel & Reiner Quick

  2. Döhler GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany

    Christian Hebeler

Authors
  1. Jörg H. Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Hebeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Markus Esswein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Moritz Göbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Reiner Quick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jörg H. Mayer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Stephan Aier

  2. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Peter Rohner

  3. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Joachim Schelp

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mayer, J.H., Hebeler, C., Esswein, M., Göbel, M., Quick, R. (2021). Evaluating a Forward-Looking Maturity Model for Enterprise Performance Management. In: Aier, S., Rohner, P., Schelp, J. (eds) Engineering the Transformation of the Enterprise. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84655-8_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84655-8_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84654-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84655-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation