IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijbisy/v43y2023i3p281-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation and comparison of various business process management tools

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Chang
  • Yian Chen
  • Qianwen Ariel Xu
  • Chang Xiong

Abstract

This paper aims to introduce, compare and contrast various commonly used business process management (BPM) tools (suites). In the first section, this research reviews the adoption of BPM tools in the industry with some concrete examples and descriptions. The continuous development trend and the benefits of integrating BPM tools into the businesses are presented. The project will then review the academic literature on BPM that would cover BPM's definition, the development of BPM theories, and the associated tools. Three BPM tools, namely Bizagi BPM Suite, ProcessMaker and Flokzu, analyse specifically will be analysed in this paper, in detail with a real business process as an example. A method adjusted from Vuksic et al. 's (2007) guidelines for selecting discrete event simulation (DES) tools will be used to evaluate and compare the BPM tools. This paper found that among the tools evaluated, Bizagi and Flokzu have a more intuitive user interface and process maker is the least user-friendly tool. Bizagi is recommended for large and middle-sized organisations and Flokzu for smaller organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Chang & Yian Chen & Qianwen Ariel Xu & Chang Xiong, 2023. "Evaluation and comparison of various business process management tools," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 43(3), pages 281-308.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijbisy:v:43:y:2023:i:3:p:281-308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=132065
    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:43:y:2023:i:3:p:281-308. 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.