Many organizations are excited and appreciate the power of Business Process

Management (BPM) however the uptake of BPM is partly hindered by the fact

that BPM as a discipline still lacks a natural home. There is no one solution that

fits all organizations – this whitepaper evaluates the various dimensions that

influence the home of BPM based on case studies across different industry

domains.

WHAT IS THE BEST HOME FOR BPM?

WHITEPAPER

Authors:

Syed Hussain, Shilpa Sathya-Nair, Meruyert Imanbayeva, Allan Fernandez

1

INTRODUCTION

rganisations globally are attracted to the concept of

process-based management. Core to this idea is the fact that

organisations can only deliver value to its customers and

stakeholders via its cross-functional business processes which in

turn executes its strategy (Tregear, 2010). Organizations have

made significant investments in a multitude of Business Process

Management (BPM) initiatives through centralized and enterprise

wide BPM groups (Jesus, Macieira, Karrer & Rosemann, 2009).

BPM Group is an internal consulting operation that is responsible for

promoting BPM and Business Architecture concepts and benefits to

the business, building and enforcing standards and a common

approach to rules definition and cross group collaboration that is

aligned with corporate strategy and focus on customer.

However the positioning of the BPM Group within the organisation

has not been a simple decision for enterprises and there is no one-

size-fits-all approach - each organization adopts a model that fits

their enterprise. There does not appear to be a framework or a

model to determine what would work for an organization based on

the key drivers and factors like culture, BPM maturity, scope of BPM

efforts, strength of IT functions, politics.

This whitepaper assesses the best practices of BPM Group

positioning in an organisation across industry domains using

success stories and failed efforts, current industry trends and

surveys. By aggregating the data, a base framework has been

devised for positioning of the BPM Home within an organization.

The framework focuses on three primary dimensions for BPM

Home in an organization - its current BPM maturity level,

organisational size and the strength of IT function. The framework

can guide and act as a starting point for organisations looking to

inculcate a BPM culture and are setting out to establish a BPM

Home.

O

BUSINESS

PROCESS

MANAGEMENT

Business Process

Management is the

improvement and

management of a firm's

end-to-end enterprise

business processes in

order to achieve three

outcomes crucial to a

performance-based,

customer-driven firm:

clarity on strategic

direction, alignment of

the firm's resources,

increased discipline in

daily operations and

value to customers and

stakeholders.

(Treat, 2014)

2

METHOD AND APPROACH TO FINDINGS

his research focuses on identifying the factors that influence what is the best

home for BPM in an organization. Not wanting to restrict our research to any

particular industry, we have analysed adoption of BPM in private and public

sector organizations across different domains, geographic locations, work settings and

demographics. The core of our research has been cases studies supported by real-

world implementation examples targeting academia and industry papers. The team

conducted a comprehensive search across several online databases such as: Gartner,

Springer, Science Direct, IEEE Xplore, BPM Leader and BP Trends and identified

cases that exactly dwells on the question. The papers comprised of research surveys,

industry trends, implementation strategies, problem-specific solutions, reasons for

adoption of BPM, causes for failure of BPM, tried and tested BPM models, organization

feedback after adoption of BPM, benchmarks for adoption of BPM and

recommendations.

Furthermore, a combination of relevant industry terminologies was used to obtain the

accurate set of research materials. Primary keywords (concepts) used as part of the

research are: BPM Governance Structure, BPM Repository Structure, Adoption of

BPM, Establishment of BPM, BPM Home, Centre of Excellence (COE), BPM

Maturity, BPM Responsibilities, Case Studies in BPM and Process Excellence.

Secondary keywords (synonyms) used are: Academic, Industry, Comparative Study,

Research Surveys, Geographic Spread, Organisation Size and Capabilities.

Final selection of papers was based on credibility of the authors in their relevant fields,

peer-reviews, platforms where the papers were published, year of publication, depth of

BPM coverage, BPM efforts, academic and industry relevance and potential future

implications.

Figure 1: Research methodology road-map

Identification Online

Literature Search

Literature Review

Literature Scope down

Literature Finalisation

T

3

NO NATURAL HOME OF BPM

PM Group (a.k.a. Business Process Centre of Excellence, BPM Centre of

Excellence, Process Team or BPM [Support] Office) has been widely

adopted by organizations to institutionalize BPM initiatives and extending the

benefits throughout the organization in a centralized and holistic approach (Jesus,

Macieira, Karrer & Rosemann, 2009). A BPM Group typically addresses certain key

focus areas of responsibility – firstly, defining a higher business goal or vision while

driving BPM initiatives and aligning individual projects with that vision; secondly,

executing a scalable delivery resource model for discovering, implementing, deploying,

managing, and supporting BPM initiatives and thirdly, administering a shared

infrastructure for hosting and maintaining the solutions that are the outcomes of BPM

initiatives (Dyer, Forget, Osmani & Zahn, 2013).

However, the uptake of Business Process Management is partly hindered by the fact

that BPM as a discipline still lacks a natural home (Jesus, Macieira, Karrer &

Rosemann, 2009). Because there is no clear home for BPM, related ownership varies

across companies from CIO to CFO to COO to business-line managers on a project-

by-project basis (P. Roberts, 2013).

According to Gartner (Robertson, 2013), if the driver for creating a full-blown BPM

Group is from the business for a new business transformation initiative, that's where

reporting will be most commonly directed. If it's the CIO or other IT leaders pushing for

this capability, particularly to focus on cross-functional issues that IT is often the first

to see, then the BPM Group will report to the CIO inside IT. In time, those with IT

reporting BPM Group often will change to business reporting over time to signal strong

business engagement for BPM activities.

When IT and Business mature in their BPM work, then the central group can disband,

or morph into more of a PMO focused activity. The BPM Group can drop back from

offering competency services, since distributed groups can do these themselves. The

BPM Group will still need to manage centralized sharing of information and tools,

coordination of education and over time, the central group can shrink in staff size, and

even in capabilities supported — more will be distributed and culturally assimilated

within the business units.

It is clear that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for this home of BPM. Organizations

need to assess the common drivers given their own specific enterprise situations in

order to choose the right starting model, as well as to refine any future changes needed

(Robertson, 2013).

B

4

BPM HOME - CURRENT INDUSTRY TRENDS

he State of Business Process Management 2014” report conducted by

BPTrends (Harmon & Wolf, 2014) over an 8 year period (2005-2013)

describes information collected from approximately 300 respondents who

took part in a BPM survey. One of the questions covered was if the organisations had a

BPM Group to provide a full range of support to business process management

initiatives within the organisation and those that did were asked where the BPM Group

was located.

Figure 2: 2014 BPTrends Where the BPM Group is Located within the Organisation

The latest 2013 trend shows that the total number of organisations with a defined BPM

home has not increased significantly over time. A third of the respondents said they did

not have a BPM Group or CoE. Almost 50% of the respondents said that they had a BPM

group. Those that did have a BPM group reported that it was located at the executive

level (15%), at the departmental or divisional level (17%), or in IT (17%). In addition, a

relatively smaller percentage of respondents (7%) mentioned that a BPM Group is

located within finance (3%), HR/Training (1%) and Quality Control (6%).

It is very evident that positioning of BPM Home is an organisational choice based on

several factors. The next section breaks down some of these key factors that were

identified from case studies.

“T

5

FACTORS THAT AFFECT WHERE BPM HOME SITS

he location of BPM home in an organisation depends on multiple factors that

play a vital role. The key factors that emerged as a result of the research are:

BPM Maturity, IT Maturity, Organisation Size, Organisation Culture, and Scope

of BPM Efforts.

BPM Maturity

(Jeston & Nelis, 2006) suggest that embedding BPM within an organization requires a

clear organizational positioning of BPM, with clear roles, responsibilities and

authorization levels and a structure that can evolve with the growing importance of

BPM within the organization. They refer to the QUT BPM maturity model (Rosemann &

de Bruin, 2004) levels to indicate the various ways in which BPM can be incorporated

into the organization structure based on the maturity.

Figure 3: BPM Maturity Level and Position within Organisation

IT Maturity

IT Maturity (a.k.a. Strength of IT function) is a measure of how well technology

supports the organization. Progressing along the IT maturity leads to a more efficient

organization – one that’s better equipped to accomplish its mission and goals (Delcor,

2014). The strength of IT in terms of its methodology, tools and technologies play an

important role while setting up the BPM home (P. Roberts, 2013). IT "engineering"

orientation helps foster strong process analysis, a strong BPM technology focus and

provides insight into cross-boundary opportunities to driver higher performance

(Robertson, 2013).

Organisation Size

According to (Reijers, van Wijk, Mutschler & Leurs, 2010) an organization’s size relates

with the phases of the BPM life cycle that a BPM project goes through. It also appears

from their study that strategic considerations are often only discussed in larger

enterprises (where objectives such as cost reductions or process optimizations play

a more important role). Small and medium-sized enterprises are not that interested in

T

6

the top-of-the-notch process technology, but do certainly aim at the application of BPM

concepts for which the gateway hurdle is significantly lower. Organisation size in this

case is refers to the number of employees in the organization and has been categorized

into small, medium and large.

Organisation Culture

Although culture is commonly considered a “soft-factor”, its strong impact on the

success of BPM adoption has been established (Hribar & Mendling, 2014).

Organizational politics are emerging as a challenge, and through 2016 they will prevent

at least one-third of business process management (BPM) efforts progressing from

one-off projects to enterprise wide adoption, according to (Gartner, 2014). BPTrends

also identified in their 2014 survey (Harmon & Wolf, 2014) that organizations are

striving to understand the relationship between BPM and culture change.

Scope of BPM Efforts

BPM Efforts can be broadly classified from an organisational perspective as either

Transactional or Transformational. Gartner (P. Roberts, 2013) suggests that to drive

enterprise wide process transformation, strong leadership from CEO/COO is required.

While relatively immature BPM enterprises focus on cost-driven, transactional,

business-rule-driven processes.

7

CASE STUDIES

ow BPM Paid Off for Wells Fargo (SWANBORG, 2009)

Organisation: Wells Fargo is a provider of banking, mortgage, investing,

credit card, insurance, and consumer and commercial financial services.

Situation: Wells Fargo maintains a decentralized structure to its 80-plus lines of

business. When an internal study revealed 10 business lines with independent BPM

initiatives, Enterprise Technology Architecture and Planning (ETAP) launched a single

working group that could save time and improve the results through collaboration.

What They Did: Today, the participating lines of business collectively own and drive

this working group, defining the approaches, processes and tools that constitute best

practice. Serving as facilitator, ETAP creates and maintains frameworks through which

the group reaches consensus. "We also make sure all content is compelling, which

entices our business leaders to want to be involved and make it successful," says

Enterprise Architect Paul Tazbaz, leader of the working group, in describing the BPM

templates, messages and market analysis that ETAP oversees and creates. The working

group also publishes its most powerful successes as case studies, which business

leaders use to sell colleagues on BPM-generated, cost-saving improvements and

customer service enhancements.

Why It Was Unique: While ETAP provides the forum and guidance, the businesses

own BPM and its success. In fact, one of the working group's own findings is that the

most successful BPM projects consistently come from groups led by a business steering

committee, rather than IT or enterprise architecture.

Takeaway: Using a bottom-up approach, BPM can take hold and produce results. Wells

Fargo has documented significant improvements in time-to-market, risk mitigation,

portfolio management and cost—the most dramatic of which resulted in a $30 million

savings by automating a lending process.

Inference: This case study shows that BPM initiatives start as individual projects in

silos and as the company matures in their BPM initiatives, BPM efforts are consolidated

to form a single working group as BPM Home which is owned by the business and

facilitated by IT.

H

8

usiness and Executive Team Support for BPM Success

(SEARLE & ROBERTSON, 2012)

Organisation: U.S.-based financial services organization.

Situation: The business process competency centre (BPCC) — based in IT — within a

U.S.-based financial services organization recognized that its relationship with the

business was broken after a couple of failed BPM projects. Consequently, the BPM team

had lost trust and credibility with the business, which resisted further BPM efforts.

What They Did: The BPM team established a BPM program with the business to

resolve the issues that caused the rift between business and IT, and to gain senior

executive buy-in for BPM.

The BPM team realized that long-term BPM success required business involvement and

accountability, but it needed to start by understanding how the business really got

work done and identifying any process pain points.

Why It Was Unique: Key deliverables included a road map to show how they intended

to address process pain points in the business, a communication plan to explain the

reasons for and benefits of doing BPM and an organizational change management

program to guide process participants through the impact of process change.

Takeaway: The BPM steering group consisted of business unit managers who each

represented their business unit. The group was responsible for making key process

implementation decisions. The senior executive team (which consisted of executive

sponsors) supported the program, which was key to driving its success. The executive

program office involved the CIO and COO, who owned the BPM vision.

Inference: This case study shows that BPM initiatives that are IT focused and managed

could fail if business is not an integral part of BPM Home. In this case the organisation

was able to learn from its past failure with BPM based in IT and later was successful

with the involvement and accountability of Business and support from the Executive

team.

B

9

ransformational Culture nurtures BPM Success P. Roberts,

J. (2013) Organisation: South Carolina Department of Health and

Human Services (SCDHSS) which delivers Medicaid, a joint federal and

state government service that funds medical care for needy people with

low income in the U.S.

The Situation: The new director (head of the department) is driving transformational

change to deliver the most health at the lowest cost. Although processes to receive

claims are mostly electronic, many processes mimic original paper-based workflows,

and have not benefited from enterprise process improvement. For the state's citizens,

Medicaid applications remain primarily paper-based and usually require applicants to

appear in-person at one of the SCDHHS offices across the state. Claims processing is a

significant operation that happens weekly based primarily on nightly file transfers and

batch processes. In South Carolina, many of the regular processes have little to no error

checking, and the systems have been developed to "assume" success of each process.

Documentation, process modelling and training is required to help people understand

the end-to-end process.

What They Did: The simple need to document the processes is critical to improving

business outcomes. Without understanding the processes, it is not possible to upgrade

the technologies. Building visual perspectives of processes helps people to see the

inefficiencies and identify the opportunities for improvements. Establishing key

process metrics also is essential to tracking improvements and focusing all the people

involved in their contribution.

Why It Was Unique: The director is an evangelist for this transformation effort, with

the deputy director/CIO as the leader, supported by the project management office and

pursuit-of-excellence teams. The pursuit of- excellence team in working to encourage

innovation is helping to drive culture change. For Medicaid eligibility, machine-

applicable rules can be defined for many programs. Thus, it can be automated, but

people have interpreted the rules in different ways through manual processes.

The Takeaway: View BPM as transformational. Ensure that you recognize that it

requires an integrated approach to innovation, culture change, people, processes and

technology. All the people must be involved at all stages to secure their commitment,

and avoid the blame game. Understand that transformation will require significant

time and investment.

Inference: This case study shows that BPM was led by deputy director/CIO and hence

it can be concluded that BPM was sitting with IT Department. It is a case of where BPM

could be successful under the watchful eye of IT but at the same time it is imperative to

have business involvement and transformational culture for BPM success.

T

10

FRAMEWORK FOR BPM HOME

ased on 19 case studies (See Appendix: Case Study Data) across industry

domains, the location of BPM Group within organisations was evaluated. A

base framework proposed below is based on three key factors – BPM Maturity,

IT Maturity and Organisation size. These factors have been discussed in detail in the

section Factors That Affect Where Bpm Home Sits. The key parameters used for

assessment of the BPM home framework have been discussed below:

BPM Maturity Parameters

BPM Maturity Level Maturity State

Level 1 BPM Projects

Loosely connected or entirely disconnected process improvement projects started with a clear agenda to target a certain issue or problem.

Level 2 BPM Program

Consolidation of multiple BPM projects with a vision to align these efforts such that they contribute directly to strategic business outcomes

Level 3 BPM Centre of Excellence

A BPM Centre of Excellence (CoE) is a governance mechanism adopted by organizations aiming for a consistent and centralized roll-out of BPM initiatives (Jesus et al., 2009)

Organisation Size Parameters

Organisation Size Number of Employees

Small < 500

Medium > 500 and < 5000

Large > 5000

Strength of IT Function

Level Strength of IT

Basic A functional organization has better technology but it works only to a point. It’s one step shy of integration and automation

Medium Technology is more than an operational tool. Technology supports the organization’s mission by adding value to the employees, customers and stakeholders

Large Strategically uses innovative technology to meet the organization’s needs and anticipate future needs

B

Figure 4: Framework for

Positioning BPM Home

11

Figure 5: BPM Home Data Mapping from Case Studies

igure 5 above shows the distribution of BPM home across the 19 organisations studied

under this research. The X and Y axis depict the BPM Maturity Levels and the Strength of

IT function respectively. The bubble size represents the size of the organisation while

the colours of the bubbles indicate where the BPM home is positioned in these organisations.

Although a natural home for BPM is debatable, from our research we have seen that successful

BPM Groups sit within the business supported by IT (occasionally supported by HR for change

management). Figures 6, 7, 8 indicate that majority of the organisations have their BPM group

positioned within the business. There are few organisations where BPM Home is with IT and

what we observe is that in such cases there is a strong IT function present in the organisation.

Many of the large organisations that are at BPM Maturity Level 3 and have a strong IT function

seem to have their BPM group positioned within the business. However there are a handful of

cases where large organisations with a strong IT function have their BPM positioned with a

hybrid model of Business and IT as their BPM Home.

Organisations with a BPM Maturity Level 2 tend to have their BPM group positioned within the

business. While organisations with a BPM Maturity Level 1 with basic to average IT Function

seem to choose to place BPM Groups in Business or IT on an even basis (50%-50%).

F

12

Figure 6: BPM Home across Organisational Size

Figure 7: BPM Home across BPM Maturity Levels

Figure 8: BPM Home across Strength of IT Functions

13

he following table has consolidated some of the best practices based on the above

mentioned case studies as well as Gartner recommended models. The table aims to be a

guide for organisations to self-evaluate themselves before making the decision on

positioning their BPM Home.

BPM Maturity

Level

Organisational

Size IT Function BPM Home

Level 1

Small, Medium,

Large Basic

BPM Group positioned in business is ideal as it can

provide direction to the initiation of BPM efforts for

the organisation

Small, Medium,

Large Average

BPM Group positioned in business is ideal as it can

align with the organisation strategy. However since

IT strength is still at an average level – positioning in

IT may not yield expected results

Small, Medium,

Large Strong

Could start with reporting to IT if the CIO is the

driver. Once the initial quick gains are realised, it is

necessary to move the home to the business to

provide a strategic alignment with IT support

Level 2 Small, Medium,

Large

Basic, Average,

Strong

BPM Group positioned in business is ideal at this

level of BPM maturity but with collaborative efforts

with IT

Level 3

Small, Medium Basic, Average,

Strong

BPM Group positioned in business is ideal at this

level of BPM maturity but with collaborative efforts

from IT for operations

Large Basic, Average,

BPM Group positioned in business is ideal at this

level of BPM maturity but with collaborative efforts

from IT for operations and optionally HR for change

management

Large Strong

BPM Group positioned in business works best.

A highly mature organisation with a cross-

collaboration culture could benefit from BPM Group

in a hybrid IT/Business model but it is best kept as

an evolution of the BPM Group, not as the initial

model

Figure 9: BPM Home Framework

T

14

PROS AND CONS

t was evident from case studies and Gartner report (Robertson, 2013) on best

practices for embedding BPM Group in an organisation that when BPM Groups

report to the business, they have a strong emphasis on business outcomes and

solving business problems (with or without technology), they generate a strong

business buy-in and participation, have a strong BPM methodology and transformation

focus (if reporting to COO), better metrics definition and typically more active process

owners driving change. It does comes with its own share of problems - advanced BPM

technologies may be ignored and IT becomes order taker, tends to overfocus on

manual process change, could sometimes lose focus on cross-boundary opportunities

(if reporting to single BU executive).

Among the most common BPM home models, BPM Group reporting to IT has its

strengths as it is easy for CIO to start quickly, tends to have a strong BPM technology

focus, provides insight into cross-boundary opportunities to driver higher performance

and IT "engineering" orientation helps foster strong process analysis. However it

usually has a lower business buy-in, tends to overfocus on technologies as solutions,

provides lower clarity on business outcomes and metrics and may even miss business

requirements and alignment areas. (Jeston & Nelis, 2014) say that they have never seen

the IT department drive BPM throughout an organization enterprise-wide in a

sustainable way as it always requires CEO drive and commitment.

(Long, 2012) is of the opinion that BPM Group residing in the Finance department,

that directly reports to the CFO can be reasonably successful because it is on the

business side, and finance is concerned with meeting the financial goals of the

company. But it is still not as effective as reporting to the COO/CEO.

(Jeston & Nelis, 2014) suggest that BPM Home could reside in HR but only with the

support of the CEO, by establishing KPIs for each level of management and employee in

the organization to achieve process-related targets. However, it is then up to the CEO

and divisional business leaders to drive it throughout the organization and make it

sustainable.

Depending upon the size of the organization and its divisions, a leader or leaders

within one or a small number of divisions may choose to implement process

management without the entire organization commitment. BPM Home residing in

business units or departments provides the flexibility but it is prone to duplication

and variance across them (Jeston & Nelis, 2014). It is potentially hard to manage as

formal reporting lines may trump BPM and focus on tactical efforts may overwhelm

development of strategic capability.

I

15

Gartner (Robertson, 2013) suggests that BPM Home in an IT/Business (hybrid)

makes sense for a BPM mature organisation as it requires an advanced level of

organizational sophistication, collaboration, span of influence (versus control) and

teamwork. For many organizations, it is best kept as an evolution of the BP

organization, not as the initial reporting structure. As BPM technology and

methodology leveraged most appropriately, it is considered as the best model to

deliver transformation and innovation BPM projects. However the matrix

management is more complex, and risks becoming bureaucratic, which slows delivery

and create a diffused accountability for driving change.

PRACTIONERS APPLICATION

PM Practitioners planning to position BPM within their Organisation shall

primarily consider vital factors for setting up a BPM Home which are BPM

Maturity, Strength of IT and Organisation Size. The three parameters shall be

cross referenced with the framework provided in this white paper to identify the best

home for BPM which would ensure that derivations are based on research based

framework model and real world case study plotting. The framework is limited to the

three researched parameters and hence an organisation with clear understanding of its

current standings with the applied parameters shall best benefit from the use of this

framework.

FURTHER STEPS AND CONCLUSION

he BPM Home framework is a step towards trying to formalize the setting up of

a BPM home for an organisation. The framework has only looked at 3 key

parameters that appeared prominent in the research conducted. The question

of positioning a BPM home is a complex one that is compounded by several other

factors like industry domain, organisational culture, organizational conflict, trust,

political issues and scope of BPM efforts that have not been focussed on in this

research. Further research into this framework could incorporate these factors to

provide a more comprehensive framework for BPM practitioners.

B

T

16

REFERENCES

Becker, J., Ortbach, K., Plattfaut, R., & Niehaves, B. (2013). Reach and Range of Business Process

Management – Findings in the Telecommunication and Chemical Industry. In 46th Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii

Boots, J. (2011). BPM Organization and Personnel–Part 1: Building a BPM Support Group that Creates Value

(1st ed.). BPTrends. Retrieved from http://www.bptrends.com/publicationfiles/12-06-2011-ART-

%20BPM%20Org%20and%20Personnel%20-%20Part%201%20-%20Boots.pdf

de Araujo, M., & de Albuquerque, J. (2014). An Actor-Network Perspective on Business Process

Management: A Case Study of a Brazilian Chemical Company. In Twentieth Americas Conference on

Information Systems. Savannah

de Bruin, T., & Doebeli, G. (2010). An Organizational Approach to BPM: The Experience of an Australian

Transport Provider. In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann, Handbook on Business Process Management

2, 559 International Handbooks on Information Systems (1st ed., pp. 559-577). Berlin: Springer-

Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

Delcor,. (2014). IT Maturity Model : DelCor. Delcor.com. Retrieved 30 August 2014, from

http://www.delcor.com/maturity/

Dyer, L., Forget, A., Osmani, F., & Zahn, J. (2013). Creating a BPM Center of Excellence (CoE) (1st ed.). IBM

Redbooks. Retrieved from http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpapers/pdfs/redp4898.pdf

Fernando, O., Santos, F., & Jabbour, C. (2008). Business Process Management in a Brazilian public research

centre. Business Process Management Journal, 14(4), 483-496. Retrieved from

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/14637150810888037

Gartner,. (2014). Gartner Says Organizational Politics Will Prevent at Least One-Third of BPM Efforts

Through 2016. Gartner.com. Retrieved 30 August 2014, from

http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/1914714

Harmon, P., & Wolf, C. (2014). The State of Business Process Management 2014. Bptrends. Retrieved from

http://www.bptrends.com/bpt/wp-content/uploads/BPTrends-State-of-BPM-Survey-Report.pdf

Hribar, B., & Mendling, J. (2014). THE CORRELATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND SUCCESS OF

BPM ADOPTION (1st ed.). Tel Aviv

HRONZA, R., & ŠPETA, M. (2013). Business Process Center of Excellence at the Faculty of Electrical

Engineering at the Czech Technical University in Prague. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on

Business Informatics

Jeston, J., & Nelis, J. (2006). Business Process Management, Practical Guidelines for successful

implementation (1st ed., p. 317). Elsevier Ltd.

Jeston, J., & Nelis, J. (2014). Business Process Management: Practical guidelines to successful

implementations (3rd ed., pp. 586-601). Retrieved from

17

http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8Q6pAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=john+jest

on+third+edition&ots=JEif_RnPMX&sig=LLO_1oihHXgT76eCH4hQB0arV30#v=onepage&q=john%2

0jeston%20third%20edition&f=false

Jesus, L., Macieira, A., Karrer, D., & Caulliraux, H. (2010). BPM Center of Excellence: The Case of a Brazilian

Company. In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann, Handbook on Business Process Management 2,

International Handbooks on Information Systems (1st ed., pp. 285-306). Berlin: Springer-Verlag

Berlin Heidelberg

Jesus, L., Macieira, A., Karrer, D., & Rosemann, M. (2009). A Framework for a BPM Center of

Excellence.Bptrends. Com.

Long, K. (2012). A Global Approach to Process Governance. Business Rules Journal, Vol.13(No. 3). Retrieved

from http://www.brcommunity.com/b643.php

Niehaves, B., Plattfaut, R., & Becker, J. (2013). Business process management capabilities in local

governments: A multi-method study. www.elsevier.com. Retrieved 31 August 2014, from

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0740624X13000373/1-s2.0-S0740624X13000373-

main.pdf?_tid=f942ba9e-30c7-11e4-aeb0-

00000aab0f26&acdnat=1409459796_aa58ae7c3b7b8c3c2a04abbe79bf2906

Olding, E. (2009). Case Study: TeliaSonera Uses BPM to Streamline Sales Process. Gartner

P. Roberts, J. (2013). Successful Approaches to Business Process Improvement. Gartner. doi:G00251411

QUT,. (2014). INN 327 BPM Teaching Case-Assignment 2. Brisbane: QUT

Reijers, H., van Wijk, S., Mutschler, B., & Leurs, M. (2010). BPM in practice: who is doing what?. Springer, 45-

60.

Robertson, B. (2013). Best Practices for BPCC Reporting Structure. Retrieved from

https://www.gartner.com/doc/2575220/best-practices-bpcc-reporting-structure

Rosemann, M. and de Bruin, T. (2004). Application of a holistic model for determining BPM maturity

Rosser, B. (2008). Case Study: Business Process Management at Siemens Canada. Gartner

Swanborg, R. (2009). How BPM Paid Off for Wells Fargo. CIO. Retrieved 30 August 2014, from

http://www.cio.com/article/2427860/business-process-management/how-bpm-paid-off-for-

wells-fargo.html

Searle, S., & Robertson, B. (2012). Four Best Practices for Establishing Effective Business Process

Governance. Gartner.com. Retrieved 30 August 2014, from

https://www.gartner.com/doc/2241619/best-practices-establishing-effective-business

Searle, S. (2013). How to Start Up and Sustain a Strategically Vital Business Process Competency Center.

Gartner.com. Retrieved 31 August 2014, from https://www.gartner.com/doc/2552715/start-

sustain-strategically-vital-business

18

Swanborg, R. (2009). How BPM Paid Off for Wells Fargo. www.cio.com. Retrieved 31 August 2014, from

http://www.cio.com/article/2427860/business-process-management/how-bpm-paid-off-for-

wells-fargo.html

Treat, M. (2014). What is BPM Anyway? Business Process Management Explained |

BPMInstitute.org.Bpminstitute.org. Retrieved 30 August 2014, from

http://www.bpminstitute.org/resources/articles/what-bpm-anyway-business-process-

management-explained

Tregear, R. (2010). Establishing the Office of Business Process Management. www.saudiabpmp.org.

Retrieved 31 August 2014, from http://www.saudiabpmp.org/wp-content/uploads/OBPM-

Presentation-ABPMP-final2.pdf

Ward-Dutton, N. (2011). Best Practice Insight BPM case study: Maersk Line. www.cio.com. Retrieved 31

August 2014, from http://www.cio.com.au/whitepaper/370922/best-practice-insight-bpm-case-

study-maersk-line/

APPENDIX

Case Studies