نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری رشته‌ی مدیریت سیستم، دانشگاه جامع امام حسین(ع)، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار گروه مدیریت سیستم، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه جامع امام حسین

3 استادیار گروه مدیریت سیستم، دانشگاه جامع امام حسین(ع)، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف از این مطالعه ارائه‌ی مدلی جامع از چابک‌سازی مدیریت فرایندهای کسب و کار با بهره‌گیری از مفهوم "لبه‌ی آشوب" در سازمان می‌باشد که از طریق ابزار مصاحبه با 18 نفر از خبرگان، تلاش گردید اجزا مؤثر در چارچوب مدیریت فرایندهای سازمانی چابک شناسایی شود تا به وسیله‌ی آن بتوان در یک محیط پیچیده به منظور رسیدن به چابکی در مدیریت فرایندها، تعادل بین نظم درونی مدیریت فرایندها و بی‌نظمی ناشی از پویایی محیطی حفظ شود. پس از تحلیل یافته‌ها و استخراج کدهای اولیه(273 کد باز)، محوری(17 کد) و 5 کد گزینشی با ضریب پایایی به میزان 7/77، مدل مفهومی که از پارادایم استراوی و کوربین الگوبرداری شد، ترسیم گردید. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد که شرایط علی مدل شامل: فرهنگ متناسب، حکمرانی فرایند، نیروی انسانی شایسته، زیرساخت فناوری و درک و شناخت محیطی، عوامل مداخله‌گر شامل: کنترل و پایش مستمر فرایندها، رهبری، بسترها مشتمل بر استراتژی‌سازی مبتنی بر بداهه، ساختار و سازمان، پایداری خلاق در مرز آشوب، سازگاری پویا، یادگیرندگی سازمانی و راهبردهای مورد نیاز در مدل، مدیریت کیفیت فرایندها یکپارچگی مدیریت دانش با فرایندهای سازمان وکارآمدسازی اجزای چرخه‌ی عمر را در برمی‌گیرند که در نهایت بکارگیری آن‌ها، ارتقا و بهبود شاخص‌های عملکردی کمی و کیفی را بدنبال خواهند داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

a framework for Business Processes Management based on the concept of "edge of chaos"

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sadegh Hasani moghadam 1
  • Mohammad Mahdi Mohtadi 2
  • Hosein Bazargani 3
  • Ali Taheri 3

1 PhD Student, System Management, Imam Hossein Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of System Management, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of System Management, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

This study aims to present a comprehensive model of agility in business process management by using the concept of "edge of chaos, " which is attempted through interviews with 18 experts. The effective components in the framework of agile organizational process management were identified so that in a complex and dynamic environment, in order to achieve agility in process management, the balance between the internal order of process management and the disorder caused by environmental dynamics can be maintained. After analyzing the findings and extracting primary codes (273 open codes), central codes (17 codes), and five selective codes with a reliability coefficient of 77.77, a conceptual model modeled on Strauss and Corbin's paradigm was drawn.
Introduction
 Today, concepts related to the science of complexity and the edge of chaos have become essential to modern management's vocabulary of theory and practice. The edge of chaos is a space where freedom of action and dynamism are combined with order and stability, the output of which will be accompanied by creativity and innovation. Therefore, the management of agile processes based on chaos theory can be considered a framework for managing organizational processes, which, in addition to maintaining the benefits of formalization and standardization of processes, also enables the adaptability of processes and their agility in general. This research seeks to model this new look and attitude in process-oriented organizations looking for agility in complex work environments.
Materials and Methods
 This study is a type of developmental research that follows interpretative philosophical foundations and an analytical, inductive approach and seeks to model data through qualitative strategies and interviews with 18 experts, who were selected using a non-random method and a snowball technique and considering that the nature of the proposed model will be used to solve a problem in process organizations, its orientation is practical.
Discussion and Results
 The Results showed that the causal conditions of the model include appropriate culture, process governance, competent human resources, technological infrastructure, and environmental understanding and recognition. Intervening factors include continuous control and monitoring of processes, leadership characteristics, and platforms, including Strategizing based on improvisation, structure and organization, creative stability on the border of chaos, dynamic adaptation, organizational learning and strategies required in the model, quality management of processes, integration of knowledge management with organization processes and efficiency of life cycle components include, their use will aim for the improvement of quantitative and qualitative performance indicators.
Conclusions
According to the existing research gap, to deal with the concept of managing agile business processes in complex environments, there is a need for a comprehensive and systematic look at managing agile organizational processes to help organizations deal with complex issues in chaotic border environments. For this purpose, a framework can be designed: First, in order to achieve agility in the management of organizational processes (a central category), the existence of primary conditions, including suitable culture, process governance, competent human resources, technological infrastructure, and environmental understanding and Intervening factors include: continuous control and monitoring of processes and leadership, in contexts and conditions including strategy-making based on improvisation, structure and organization, creative stability on the border of chaos, dynamic adaptation, organizational learning and through management strategies The quality of the processes is the integration of knowledge management with the organization processes and the optimization of the life cycle components, which will ultimately lead to attention to these issues, the promotion and improvement of quantitative and qualitative performance indicators

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Agility
  • business process management
  • agile process management
  • edge of chaos
  1. دانایی‌فرد، حسن، (1392). علم پیچیدگی و خط­مشی­گذاری عمومی، فصلنامه روش­شناسی علوم انسانی، 19(76)، 39- 7
  2. رستگار، عباسعلی و همکاران، (1396). تدوین روش­شناسی و چارچوب نظری در نقد فلسفی تئوری­های سازمان و مدیریت (موردمطالعه: نقد تئوری آشوب). فصلنامه مطالعات منابع انسانی، 6(25)، 140-125
  3. سلطان باغ­شاهی، طیبه و حمیدرضا رضوانی، (1398). ارائه الگویی برای بهبود عملکرد سازمان از طریق چابکی فرایندهای سازمانی در شرکت­های حمل‌ونقل دریایی. دومین کنفرانس مدیریت اقتصاد و حسابداری با رویکرد چابک سازی سازمانی، تهران.
  4. طاهری، علی و احسان صنعتی مقدم، (1398). پیکره­ی عمومی دانش مدیریت فرایندها (BPM CBOK). جلد اول، انتشارات رواق اندیشه
  5. عبدی، نریمان و همکاران، (1390). تأثیر ﻓﺮاﯾﻨﺪﻣﺤﻮری ﺑﺮ ﭼﺎﺑﮑﯽ سازمان­ها (مطالعه­ی موردی: بانک کشاورزی استان کردستان). دومین همایش ملی مدیریت فرایندهای سازمانی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران: ایران
  6. فرد، ملیکا و همکاران، (1400). طراحی مدل توسعه کارآفرینی دیجیتال در شرکت­های دانش‌بنیان کوچک و متوسط با تأکید بر سیاست­های اقتصاد مقاومتی. فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی بسیج، 24(90)، 139- 103
  7. کنعانی، فاطمه و همکاران، (1389). حرکت به‌سوی سیستم­های خلاق و خود سازمان­ده: روشن­سازی مفهوم لبه­ی آشوب در یادگیری الکترونیکی. نشریه­ی الکترونیکی علوم و فناوری اطلاعات، 26(2)، 488- 465
  8. مشهدی جعفرنظری، آرزو و مجید معتمدی، (1398). ارائه­ی چارچوبی برای تأثیر مدیریت فرایند کسب‌وکار بر چابکی سازمانی در سازمان­های خدماتی ایران. سومین کنفرانس بین­المللی مدیریت دانش، بلاکچین و اقتصاد، تهران: ایران
  9. مولایی، الهه و علی حاجی غلام سریزدی، (1395). تحلیل دینامیکی تأثیر عوامل مهندسی مجدد فرایند کسب‌وکار بر چابکی سازمان (موردمطالعه: سازمان بنادر و دریانوردی). اولین کنفرانس بین­المللی مدیریت صنعتی، تهران: انجمن علمی مدیریت صنعتی ایران
  10. Aysolmaz et al. (2018). A Reflection on the Interrelations Between Business Process Management and Requirements Engineering with an Agility Perspective, In book: Business Process Management Workshops. 669-680.
  11. Badakhshan, P., Conboy, K., Grisold, T. and vom Brocke, J. (2019). Agile business process management: A systematic literature review and an integrated framework", Business Process Management Journal, DOI: 10.1108/BPMJ-12-2018-0347.
  12. Bernardo JuniorSilvia Ines Dallavalle de Padua. (2023). Toward agile Business Process Management: Description of concepts and a proposed definition, Knowledge and Process Management.30(1), 14- 32.
  13. Bititci, U. S. Ackermann, F. Ates, A. Davies, J. Garengo, P. Gibb, S. & Shafti, F. (2011). Managerial processes: business process that sustain performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(8), 851-891.
  14. Bitkowska, A., Damian D and Tomasz G. (2022). Towards Cloud Agile Business Process Management, Communications of the IBIMA, Vol. 2022, Article ID 821632, DOI: 10.5171/2022.821632
  15. Bruno, G., Dengler, F., Jennings, B., Khalaf, R., Nurcan, S., Prilla, M. and Silva, R. (2011). Key challenges for enabling agile BPM with social software, Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 23(4), 297-326.
  16. De Morais, R. M., Kazan, S., de Padua, S. I. D., & Costa, A. L. (2014). An analysis of BPM lifecycles: from a literature review to a framework proposal. Business Process Management Journal, 3(20), 412-432.
  17. Gebhart, M., Mevius, M. and Wiedmann, P. (2014). Business process evaluation in agile business process management using quality models”, International Journal of Advanced Life Sciences, 6(3), 279-290.
  18. Gross, S., Stelzl, K., Grisold, T., Mendling, J., Roglinger, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2021). The Business Process Design Space for exploring process redesign alternatives. Business Process Management Journal, 37(4), 378–382.
  19. Gwet, K.L. (2014). Handbook of inter-rater reliability: The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters. Advanced Analytics LLC.
  20. Horner, S. & Schmitt, A. (2018). Implementierung agiler praktiken in geschcaftsprozesse, in Mikuzs, M., Volland, A., Engstler, M., Hanser, E. and Linssen, O. (Eds), Projektmanagement und Vorgehensmodelle, Der Einfluss der Digitalisierung auf Projektmanagementmethoden und Entwicklungsprozesse, Gesellschaft fur Informatik, Bonn, 169-173.
  21. Jackson, Michael. (2003). Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers, University of Hull Hull, United Kingdom
  22. Jurisch, M. C., Palka, W., Wolf, P., Krcmar, H. (2014). Which capabilities matter for successful business process change? Business Process Management Journal, 20 (1), 47-67.
  23. Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  24. Kerpedzhiev, G. (2016). The Future of Business Process Management in the Future of Work, Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), İstanbul, Turkey
  25. Kohlborn, T., Muller, O., Poeppelbuß, J. and Roglinger, M. (2014). New frontiers in Business Process Management (BPM), Business Process Management Journal, 26(2), DOI:1108/BPMJ-02-2014-0015
  26. Koopman, A & Lisa F. Seymour. (2020). Factors Impacting Successful BPMS Adoption and Use: A South African Financial Services Case Study, Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processingbook series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49418-6_4
  27. Kushwaha, A. K., Kar, A. K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Applications of big data in emerging management disciplines: A literature review using text mining. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 1(2), https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jjimei.2021.100017
  28. Lederer, Matthias & Julia Thummerer. (2022). Organizing a Self-organized Team: Towards a Maturity Model for Agile Business Process Management, International Conference on Subject-Oriented BPM, S-BPM ONE 2022: Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. Dynamic Digital Design of Everything – Designing or being designed?152–164.
  29. Martins, P.V. and Zacarias, M. (2017). An agile business process improvement methodology, Procedia Computer Science, 129-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.018
  30. McCarthy, I.P., Rakotobe-Joel, T. and Frizelle, G. (2000). Complex systems theory: implications and promises for manufacturing organizations, J. Manufacturing Technology and Management, Vol. 2, Nos. 1–7, 559–579.
  31. Mesjasz Czesław. (2019). An Organization on the Edge of Chaos: The Origins of the Metaphor and its Impact on the Theory and Practice of Strategic ManagementManagement Sciences. Nauki o Zarządzaniu, Sciendo, 24(2), 3-8.
  32. Meziani, R. and Saleh, I. (2010). Towards a collaborative business process management methodology, International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems (ICMCS), 1-6.
  33. Meziani, Rachid. (2014). Achieving Business Process Agility through a Pragmatic Approach, International Journal of Computer and Electrical Engineering, 6(1), 59-63.
  34. Morgan, G. (1998). Images of Organization.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  35. Ohlsson, J., Han, S., Bouwman, H. (2017). The prioritization and categorization method (PCM) process evaluation at Ericsson: a case study. Business Process Management Journal (23:2), 377-398.
  36. Ozdenizci, Busra Kose. (2020). Business process management approach for improving agile software process and agile maturity, https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2331
  37. Papulova, Emilia. (2020). Promoting process approach to management, SHS Web of Conferences 83, 01050, https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20208301050
  38. Pina, C, M., Vieira da Cunha, J. (2006). Towards a complexity theory of strategy, Management Decision, 44(7), 839-850.
  39. Reijers, H. A. (2021). Business Process Management: The evolution of a discipline. Computers in Industry, 126, [103404].  https://doi.org/1016/j .compind. 2021. 103404
  40. Rito-Silva, A., Meziani, R., Magalhaes, R., Martinho, D., Aguiar, A. and Flores, N. (2009). AGILIPO: embedding social software features into business process tools, in Rinderle-Ma, S., Sadiq, S. and Leymann, F. (Eds), Business Process Management Workshops, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, 219-230.
  41. Rodriguez, , Molina, E. (2018). The experience of implementation with Agile Business Process Management, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, 3(4), 284-294.
  42. Simmons, B. L., White, M. A. (1999). The relationship between ISO 9000 and business performance: Does registration really matter? Journal of Managerial Issues, 11(3), 330– 343.
  43. Staff(2015). Agile BPM: Agile Development and Business Process Management, https://www.sixsigmadaily.com/agile-bpm-agile-development -and-business-process-management
  44. Tahir A., Van Looy, A. (2020). Business Process Management and Digital Innovations: A Systematic Literature Review, Sustainability12(17), 6827, DOI :  3390/ su 12176827
  45. van Eijnatten, F.M.and Putnik, G.D. (2004). Chaos, complexity, learning, and the learning organization: Towards a chaordic enterprise, The Learning Organization, 11(6), 418-429. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470410548782
  46. von Rosing, M., von Scheel, J. and Gill, A.Q. (2015). Applying agile principles to BPM, in von Rosing,M., von Scheel, H. and Scheer, A.W. (Eds), The Complete Business Process Handbook: Body of Knowledge from Process Modeling to BPM, Morgan Kaufmann, 79-88.
  47. Wouter, A., De Smet, A, & Weerda, K. (2015). Agility: It rhymes with stability, McKinsey Quarterly. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/agility-it-rhymes-with-stability