使用功能需求评估过程性能管理工具

Christian Ritter, Susanne Leist, Josef Blasini
{"title":"使用功能需求评估过程性能管理工具","authors":"Christian Ritter, Susanne Leist, Josef Blasini","doi":"10.1109/CBI.2015.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Process Performance Management (PPM) supports companies in planning, monitoring, and improving process performance. Many PPM tools are available, but often companies choose not to utilize these tools. Instead they implement and use proprietary in-house PPM solutions. A possible explanation for not using a standard tool can either be seen in the tools' incomplete support of the functional requirements of the individual company's business context and needs, or in the missing knowledge of decision makers concerning a proper tool evaluation and selection. These two questions are addressed by this paper. We identified the most relevant functional requirements of a PPM-tool by conducting multiple literature reviews. The functional requirements were operationalized by evaluation criteria from literature. We performed an evaluation of ten selected PPM-tools to validate the applicability of the evaluation criteria. This evaluation let us describe the average criteria coverage for each of the functional requirements and for each tool to elaborate the main differences. Additionally, we analyze tool support of the functional requirements and deduct evaluation recommendations for certain business contexts.","PeriodicalId":238097,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 17th Conference on Business Informatics","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Functional Requirements to Evaluate Process Performance Management Tools\",\"authors\":\"Christian Ritter, Susanne Leist, Josef Blasini\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CBI.2015.14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Process Performance Management (PPM) supports companies in planning, monitoring, and improving process performance. Many PPM tools are available, but often companies choose not to utilize these tools. Instead they implement and use proprietary in-house PPM solutions. A possible explanation for not using a standard tool can either be seen in the tools' incomplete support of the functional requirements of the individual company's business context and needs, or in the missing knowledge of decision makers concerning a proper tool evaluation and selection. These two questions are addressed by this paper. We identified the most relevant functional requirements of a PPM-tool by conducting multiple literature reviews. The functional requirements were operationalized by evaluation criteria from literature. We performed an evaluation of ten selected PPM-tools to validate the applicability of the evaluation criteria. This evaluation let us describe the average criteria coverage for each of the functional requirements and for each tool to elaborate the main differences. Additionally, we analyze tool support of the functional requirements and deduct evaluation recommendations for certain business contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":238097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE 17th Conference on Business Informatics\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE 17th Conference on Business Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2015.14\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE 17th Conference on Business Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2015.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

过程性能管理(PPM)支持公司计划、监视和改进过程性能。许多PPM工具都是可用的,但是公司经常选择不使用这些工具。相反,他们实现并使用专有的内部PPM解决方案。不使用标准工具的一个可能的解释是,这些工具不能完全支持单个公司的业务环境和需求的功能需求,或者决策者缺乏关于适当的工具评估和选择的知识。本文对这两个问题进行了探讨。我们通过多次文献回顾确定了ppm工具最相关的功能需求。根据文献中的评价标准对功能需求进行操作化。我们对十个选择的ppm工具进行了评估,以验证评估标准的适用性。这个评估让我们描述了每个功能需求和每个工具的平均标准覆盖率,以详细说明主要差异。此外,我们分析功能需求的工具支持,并推导出针对特定业务上下文的评估建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Functional Requirements to Evaluate Process Performance Management Tools
Process Performance Management (PPM) supports companies in planning, monitoring, and improving process performance. Many PPM tools are available, but often companies choose not to utilize these tools. Instead they implement and use proprietary in-house PPM solutions. A possible explanation for not using a standard tool can either be seen in the tools' incomplete support of the functional requirements of the individual company's business context and needs, or in the missing knowledge of decision makers concerning a proper tool evaluation and selection. These two questions are addressed by this paper. We identified the most relevant functional requirements of a PPM-tool by conducting multiple literature reviews. The functional requirements were operationalized by evaluation criteria from literature. We performed an evaluation of ten selected PPM-tools to validate the applicability of the evaluation criteria. This evaluation let us describe the average criteria coverage for each of the functional requirements and for each tool to elaborate the main differences. Additionally, we analyze tool support of the functional requirements and deduct evaluation recommendations for certain business contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信