Key challenges for enabling agile BPM with social software

  • Authors:
  • Giorgio Bruno;Frank Dengler;Ben Jennings;Rania Khalaf;Selmin Nurcan;Michael Prilla;Marcello Sarini;Rainer Schmidt;Rito Silva

  • Affiliations:
  • Dip. Automatica e Informatica, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy;Institut AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, KIT-Campus S üd Geb. 11.40 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany;University College London, 44 Hartswood Avenue, Reigate, Surrey, U.K.;IBM TJ Watson Research Center, 1 Rogers St, Cambridge, MA 02142, U.S.A.;University Paris, 1 Panth éon, Sorbonne, Paris, France and af10 IAE de Paris—Sorbonne Graduate Business School, 21, rue Broca, 75005 Paris, France;University of Bochum, Institute for Applied Work Science, Chair of Information and Technology Management, Universitaetsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany;Department of Psychology—University of Milano-Bicocca, Piazza Ateneo Nuovo, 1, Milano, Italy;Aalen University, Anton-Huber-Str. 25, 73430 Aalen, Germany;INESC-ID/IST/Technical University of Lisbon, Rua Alves Redol 9, 1000-029 Lisboa, Portugal

  • Venue:
  • Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice
  • Year:
  • 2011

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Business Process Management is called agile when it is able to react quickly and adequately to internal and external events. Agile Business Process Management requires putting the life cycle of business processes on a new paradigm. It is advocated in this paper that social software allows us to satisfy the key requirements for enabling agile BPM by applying the four features of social software: weak ties, social production, egalitarianism and mutual service provision. Organizational and semantic integration and responsiveness (of the business processes engineering, execution and management activities) have been identified as the main requirements for implementing an agile BPM life cycle. Social software may be used in the BPM life cycle in several manners and using numerous approaches. This paper presents seven among them and then analyzes the ‘support’ effects between those approaches and the underlying social software features, and the three requirements for Agile BPM. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.