IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infsem/v22y2024i3d10.1007_s10257-024-00684-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Idea generation in exploitative and explorative business process redesign techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Groß

    (Vienna University of Economics and Business)

  • Thomas Grisold

    (University of St. Gallen)

  • Jan Mendling

    (Vienna University of Economics and Business
    Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
    Weizenbaum Institute)

  • Jennifer Haase

    (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
    Weizenbaum Institute)

Abstract

Business process redesign has received considerable attention in research and practice. An important task contributing to redesign is idea generation. It has been argued that the choice of technique influences redesign outcomes, but empirical evidence is largely missing. In this paper, we examine the role of idea generation in business process redesign by comparing two different kinds of techniques: exploitative and explorative redesign techniques. Often, exploitative techniques are expected to yield more appropriate solutions, while explorative techniques are associated with more creative outcomes. To investigate such propositions, we consider the Best Practices of Process Redesign as an example of an exploitative redesign technique and the Business Process Design Space as an explorative redesign technique. We conducted a free-simulation experiment to study the empirical impact of the choice of redesign techniques on outcomes. We find that the Business Process Design Space leads to a higher number of redesign ideas, which are also more diverse. These are more creative and novel than ideas produced by the Best Practices of Process Redesign. Against expectation, the best practices as an exploitative approach do not produce more appropriate nor impactful ideas in our task design. Since both approaches cover different areas of improvement, a key implication of our work is that they should not be seen as isolated approaches to redesign; rather, they should be purposefully combined to not only create novel but also operational business process redesigns.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Groß & Thomas Grisold & Jan Mendling & Jennifer Haase, 2024. "Idea generation in exploitative and explorative business process redesign techniques," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 527-555, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:infsem:v:22:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10257-024-00684-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10257-024-00684-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10257-024-00684-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10257-024-00684-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Eric von Hippel & Georg von Krogh, 2016. "CROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 207-221, February.
    3. Michael Rosemann, 2018. "The NESTT: Rapid Process Redesign at Queensland University of Technology," Management for Professionals, in: Jan vom Brocke & Jan Mendling (ed.), Business Process Management Cases, pages 169-185, Springer.
    4. Joseph K. Goodman & Gabriele Paolacci, 2017. "Crowdsourcing Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(1), pages 196-210.
    5. Nambisan, Satish & Wright, Mike & Feldman, Maryann, 2019. "The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    6. Bendik Bygstad & Egil Øvrelid, 2020. "Architectural alignment of process innovation and digital infrastructure in a high-tech hospital," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 220-237, May.
    7. Hammer, Michael & Champy, James, 1993. "Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 90-91.
    8. Abayomi Baiyere & Hannu Salmela & Tommi Tapanainen, 2020. "Digital transformation and the new logics of business process management," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 238-259, May.
    9. Youngjin Yoo & Ola Henfridsson & Kalle Lyytinen, 2010. "Research Commentary ---The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 724-735, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sabrina Hoessler & Claus-Christian Carbon, 2024. "Digital transformation in incumbent companies: a qualitative study on exploration and exploitation activities in innovation," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-31, December.
    2. Jeehan A. R. Awad & Rodrigo Martín-Rojas, 2024. "Digital transformation influence on organisational resilience through organisational learning and innovation," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    3. Muhammad Farooq Islam & Ozge Can, 2024. "Integrating digital and sustainable entrepreneurship through business models: a bibliometric analysis," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Stefano D’Angelo & Angelo Cavallo & Antonio Ghezzi & Francesco Di Lorenzo, 2024. "Understanding corporate entrepreneurship in the digital age: a review and research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(12), pages 3719-3774, December.
    5. Jean-Michel Sahut & Luca Iandoli & Frédéric Teulon, 2021. "The age of digital entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1159-1169, February.
    6. Cong Cheng & Hongfang Cui, 2024. "Combining digital and legacy technologies: firm digital transformation strategies—evidence from Chinese manufacturing companies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Satish Nambisan & Yadong Luo, 2021. "Toward a loose coupling view of digital globalization," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(8), pages 1646-1663, October.
    8. Conrad Wiedeler & Nadine Kammerlander, 2021. "Learning the ropes of entrepreneurship: understanding internal corporate venturing for family firms from an entrepreneurial learning perspective," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 669-703, April.
    9. Jens Foerderer & Thomas Kude & Sunil Mithas & Armin Heinzl, 2018. "Does Platform Owner’s Entry Crowd Out Innovation? Evidence from Google Photos," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 444-460, June.
    10. Kroh, Julia & Globocnik, Dietfried & Schultz, Carsten & Holdhof, Frederike & Salomo, Søren, 2024. "Micro-foundations of digital innovation capability – A mixed method approach to develop and validate a multi-dimensional measurement instrument," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    11. Bryan Hong, 2020. "Power to the outsiders: External hiring and decision authority allocation within organizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1628-1652, September.
    12. Thomas Grisold & Christian Janiesch & Maximilian Röglinger & Moe Thandar Wynn, 2024. "Managing Dynamics in and Around Business Processes," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 66(5), pages 533-540, October.
    13. Belitski, Maksim & Korosteleva, Julia & Piscitello, Lucia, 2023. "Digital affordances and entrepreneurial dynamics: New evidence from European regions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    14. Changwei Pang & Qiong Wang, 2024. "How Digital Transformation Promotes Disruptive Innovation? Evidence from Chinese Entrepreneurial Firms," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 7788-7818, June.
    15. Jonathan Wareham & Paul B. Fox & Josep Lluís Cano Giner, 2014. "Technology Ecosystem Governance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1195-1215, August.
    16. Miozza, Mario & Brunetta, Federica & Appio, Francesco Paolo, 2024. "Digital transformation of the Pharmaceutical Industry: A future research agenda for management studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    17. Teng, J. T. C. & Grover, V. & Fiedler, K. D., 1996. "Developing strategic perspectives on business process reengineering: From process reconfiguration to organizational change," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 271-294, June.
    18. Trocin, Cristina & Hovland, Ingrid Våge & Mikalef, Patrick & Dremel, Christian, 2021. "How Artificial Intelligence affords digital innovation: A cross-case analysis of Scandinavian companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Maria Elisavet Balta & Thanos Papadopoulos & Konstantina Spanaki, 2024. "Business model pivoting and digital technologies in turbulent environments," Post-Print hal-04513406, HAL.
    20. Zaheer, Hasnain & Breyer, Yvonne & Dumay, John & Enjeti, Mahesh, 2022. "The entrepreneurial journeys of digital start-up founders," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    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:spr:infsem:v:22:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10257-024-00684-0. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.