IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v4y2001i2p118-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dealing with the complexity of business systems architecting

Author

Listed:
  • F.P.M. Biemans
  • M.M. Lankhorst
  • W.B. Teeuw
  • R.G. van de Wetering

Abstract

Engineers are trained to design systems such as bridges, computers, and aircraft in a well‐structured manner. However, the design of business processes has not yet matured to this level. We argue that the complexity of business processes is the major cause. In this paper, we investigate the causes of this complexity, and provide heuristics to master this complexity. Business process “architecting,” the high‐level, functional design of business processes, is more an art than a science. Consequently, experience is very important. The heuristics we provide are based on an analysis of the reasons why business process architecting is so complex as well as our experience resulting from the Testbed project, a cooperative project of industry and research organizations. We conclude by discussing some basic requirements for modeling concepts and methods. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Syst Eng 4: 118–133, 2001

Suggested Citation

  • F.P.M. Biemans & M.M. Lankhorst & W.B. Teeuw & R.G. van de Wetering, 2001. "Dealing with the complexity of business systems architecting," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 118-133.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:4:y:2001:i:2:p:118-133
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.1010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.1010
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.1010?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    2. Paul G. Carlock & Robert E. Fenton, 2001. "System of Systems (SoS) enterprise systems engineering for information‐intensive organizations," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 242-261.
    3. Christopher W. Karvetski & James H. Lambert, 2012. "Evaluating deep uncertainties in strategic priority‐setting with an application to facility energy investments," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 483-493, December.

    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. Alan Hevner & Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau & Jacky Akoka & Nicolas Prat, 2018. "A pragmatic approach for identifying and managing design science research goals and evaluation criteria," Post-Print hal-02283783, HAL.
    2. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    3. Sunder Shyam, 2011. "Imagined Worlds of Accounting," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Fiori Stefano, 2005. "The emergence of instructions : some open problems in Hayek's theory," CESMEP Working Papers 200504, University of Turin.
    5. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    6. Jin P. Gerlach & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2022. "Overcoming the Single-IS Paradigm in Individual-Level IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 476-488, June.
    7. Basile, Luigi Jesus & Carbonara, Nunzia & Pellegrino, Roberta & Panniello, Umberto, 2023. "Business intelligence in the healthcare industry: The utilization of a data-driven approach to support clinical decision making," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Loris Gaio, 2005. "A diversity-based approach to requirements tracing in new product development," ROCK Working Papers 031, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    9. B. A. Huberman & N. S. Glance, "undated". "Diversity and Collective Action," Working Papers _001, Xerox Research Park.
    10. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    11. Juval Portugali & Egbert Stolk, 2014. "A SIRN View on Design Thinking—An Urban Design Perspective," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 41(5), pages 829-846, October.
    12. Gilbert Giacomoni & Adel Aloui, 2018. "Imaginaire et imitation du réel : genèse des idées et sciences de l’artificiel," Post-Print hal-01941661, HAL.
    13. Funk, Jeffery, 2009. "Components, systems and discontinuities: The case of magnetic recording and playback equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1192-1202, September.
    14. Richard Holt & J. Barkley Rosser & David Colander, 2011. "The Complexity Era in Economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 357-369.
    15. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    16. Karén Hovhannissian & Marco Valente, 2004. "Modeling Directed Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes: Depth and Breadth," ROCK Working Papers 028, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 17 Jun 2008.
    17. Pan Guo & Xiaofeng Li & Yanlin Jia & Xu Zhang, 2020. "Cloud Model-Based Comprehensive Evaluation Method for Entrepreneurs’ Uncertainty Tolerance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-14, September.
    18. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    19. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    20. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic & Michel Gutsatz, 2000. "Managerial Competencies for Organizational Flexibility: The Luxury Goods Industry between Tradition and Postmodernism," Post-Print hal-01892018, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:syseng:v:4:y:2001:i:2:p:118-133. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    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.