IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijbisy/v21y2016i2p137-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Business process analysis: a process warehouse-based resource preference evaluation method

Author

Listed:
  • Abid Sohail
  • P.D.D. Dominic
  • Khurram Shahzad

Abstract

In a working environment, resources are commonly shared between tasks, and sometime multiple resources are necessary to commence a single task, this scenario makes the resource utilisation complex. Existing studies on business process analysis and evaluations widely focused on competence of resource to measure work performance, but it is contended that the relationship of resource with task is not sufficiently understood due to not considering evaluations of all resource classes. Particularly, business intelligence-based approaches to BPI have not adequately explored this relationship. Subsequently, a set of relationships between human resources, non-human resources and tasks (named suitability, preference and competence) are presented. However, only human resources relationship with non-human resources (named preference) is presented in detail, as a resource preference model. The model bundled with the presented preference evaluation method guides users for evaluation of resources preference. The applicability of the method is illustrated through a healthcare case study. Quality of data produces is evaluated though an empirical study, that is confirming the claim of highly relevant information generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Abid Sohail & P.D.D. Dominic & Khurram Shahzad, 2016. "Business process analysis: a process warehouse-based resource preference evaluation method," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(2), pages 137-161.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijbisy:v:21:y:2016:i:2:p:137-161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=74255
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijbisy:v:21:y:2016:i:2:p:137-161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=172 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.