Modeling an Agile Enterprise: Reconciling Systems and Process Thinking

  • Ilia Bider
  • Gene Bellinger
  • Erik Perjons
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 92)


Selection of an enterprise modeling paradigm depends on the practical task the modeling project is trying to achieve. For example, modeling in the frame of Enterprise Architecture paradigm is, usually, aimed at alignment of the enterprise components, such as mission, vision, business processes, services and IT systems. Modeling in the frame of Business Process Management is aimed at process improvement/optimization, and modeling in the Systems Thinking paradigm is aimed at getting a holistic view on the dynamic behavior of the enterprise. This paper suggests a new approach to enterprise modeling that combine these approaches in order to reveal and improve enterprise agility. It is based on the systemic view of business processes, and it presents an enterprise as a three-layered model consisting of assets, sensors and business process instances. Elements of this model can be recursively decomposed, which allows for different levels of details when modeling an enterprise.


Business Process Management Systems Thinking Enterprise Agility 


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management. Concepts, Languages, Architecture. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harmon, P.: Business Process Change. A Guide for Business Managers and BPM and Six Sigma Professionals. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stelzer, D.: Enterprise Architecture Principles: Literature Review and Research Directions. In: Dan, A., Gittler, F., Toumani, F. (eds.) ICSOC/ServiceWave 2009. LNCS, vol. 6275, pp. 12–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Proper, E., Lankhorst, M.M., Schönherr, M., Barjis, J., Overbeek, S. (eds.): TEAR 2010. LNBIP, vol. 70. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Checkland, P.: Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Wiley, Chichester (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jackson, M.C.: Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers. Wiley, Chichester (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Malone, T., Crowston, K., Lee, J., Pentland, B., Dellarocas, C., Wyner, G., Quimby, J., Osborn, C., Bernstein, A., Herman, G., Klein, M., O’Donnell, E.: Towards a Handbook of Organisational Processes. Management Science 45(3) (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sherehiy, B., Karwowski, W., Layer, J.K.: A review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. International Journal of Industrial Economics 37, 445–460 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Beer, S.: Brain of the Firm; Allen Lane. The Penguin Press, London (1972)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Viable Systems Model, Wikipedia,
  13. 13.
    Lawson, H.: A Journey Through the Systems Landscape. College Publications (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Minsky, H.P.: The Financial Instability Hypothesis. The Jerome Levy Economics Institute Working Paper No. 74. SSRN (May 1992), doi:10.2139/ssrn.161024
  15. 15.
    Khomyakov, M., Bider, I.: Achieving Workflow Flexibility through Taming the Chaos. In: Patel, D., Choudhury, I., Patel, S., de Cesare, S. (eds.) OOIS 2000 - 6th International Conference on Object Oriented Information Systems, pp. 85–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bider, I., Perjons, E., Johannesson, P.: A strategy for merging social software with business process support. In: Muehlen, M.z., Su, J. (eds.) J.1, H.4, D.2. Part IV. LNBIP, vol. 66, pp. 372–383. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bider, I., Johannesson, P., Schmidt, R.: Experiences of Using Different Communication Styles in Business Process Support Systems with the Shared Spaces Architecture. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) CAiSE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6741, pp. 299–313. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    iPB Reference Manual (on-line documentation). IbisSoft (2009),

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilia Bider
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gene Bellinger
    • 3
  • Erik Perjons
    • 1
  1. 1.DSVStockholm University, StockholmKistaSweden
  2. 2.IbisSoft AB, StockholmStockholmSweden
  3. 3.SystemsWiki.orgSweden

Personalised recommendations