Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study on Business Process Maturity Models

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study on Business Process Maturity Models Amy Van Looy 1,2 1 University College Ghent, Department of Management & Informatics, Voskenslaan 270, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium amy.vanlooy@hogent.be 2 Ghent University, Department of Management Information Science & Operations Management, Tweekerkenstraat 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium Amy.VanLooy@UGent.be Abstract. This article recalls the business process discussion between Carr, who stated that IT does not matter, and Smith and Finger, who proclaimed the opposite. In the end, both visions agreed that IT (or process deployment) counts, but must follow the business strategy (or process modeling). The present study broadens the discussion towards business process maturity, which is a more recent perspective within the literature on business processes. Various authors have proposed a maturity model to guide organizations on their journey to process excellence. However, to what extent do they rely on IT? A twofold approach is adopted, which starts by giving an overview of the academic and non-academic process maturity models. Afterwards, the components within each model are discussed to verify the impact of IT. This comparison suggests that IT-neutral models allow organizations to deal with organization-specific characteristics. IT does not matter after all, but it enables process maturity. Keywords: business process maturity, business process management, business process orientation, business process integration. 1 Introduction Today s customers have higher requirements than ever before. In a growing globalized market, organizations are striving to excel in order to gain competitive advantage or to outperform in their societal obligations. As a result, organizations are increasingly focusing on their business processes [1]. Business process management is expected to contribute to both process excellence and business excellence by assuring a uniform way of working and by continuously looking for optimizations. As the possibilities of IT continue to grow, business processes are enabled to cross the borders of departments and organizations [2,3]. Frequently used terms are e-business, virtual networks, or extended and seamless organizations. Likewise, cross-organizational collaboration is apparent in the public sector, albeit with a less stringent IT driver, e.g. public-private partnerships and multi-level governance. R. Meersman et al. (Eds.): OTM 2010 Workshops, LNCS 6428, pp. 687 697, 2010. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

688 A. Van Looy Since the journey towards process excellence is challenging, various authors have proposed step by step road maps with best practices. These road maps are called business process maturity models (BPMMs). They are evolutionary models for measuring (AS-IS) and gradually improving (TO-BE) process maturity, or the extent to which an organization consistently implements processes within a defined scope that contributes to the achievement of its business goals [4, p.2]. Business process maturity has received a great deal of attention in literature. Consequently, the proliferation of BPMMs prompts us to evaluate their usefulness in today s society. To our knowledge, few attempts have been made by [5,6,7,8]. Nonetheless, these studies lack a comprehensive review of both academic and non-academic frameworks. For this purpose, the PhD dissertation ultimately elaborates the topic of BPMM. Its objective is to present a BPMM for properly measuring (AS-IS) and improving (TO-BE) crossorganizational process maturity, which implies either an existing model with adjustments where needed, or a new one. Besides its scientific relevance, the final model will be of practical use for organizations that struggle with process integration. The research questions are: (1) does a BPMM exist for cross-organizational collaboration? (2) what is the importance of IT to achieve higher business process maturity? (3) what is the impact of higher business process maturity on business excellence? This study focuses on the second question, which is inspired by the debate between Carr [9], Smith and Finger [10]. The hypothesis is that a generic BPMM does not include IT to acknowledge organization-specific characteristics, such as size and type. The subsequent section deals with the methodology. Next, the yielded results are presented and discussed. Afterwards the plans for future work are described. The last section concludes by summarizing the importance of IT for business process maturity. 2 Methodology The research approach is twofold: (1) an overview of BPMMs, and (2) an elaboration of the IT impact within different perspectives. Before going into detail, we explain the data collection technique and the theoretical model components to validate the results. 2.1 Overview of Business Process Maturity Models: Data Collection The research scope was set to generic business processes. Hence, it excludes BPMMs that are limited to specific process types, such as software engineering, product development or human resources. However, models that integrate various specific BPMMs were withheld to represent those specific topics. Data was collected during the second quarter of 2010. First, we searched for articles in academic databases and search engines on the Internet by using the combined keywords of process and maturity. Secondly, we traced the references in the identified articles to get access to other relevant sources. We acknowledge some restrictions regarding the accessibility of articles (in Ghent University engines), the language (English, Dutch, French or German), and the keywords. Notwithstanding these limitations, the technique turned out to be fruitful.

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study 689 2.2 Comparison of the Model Components: Literature Study During data collection, we experienced that the models emphasized different elements of a typical process life cycle. Some were limited to (1) modeling and (2) deployment, whereas others included (3) optimization and (4) management, or even considered the organization s (5) culture and (6) structure. In pairs, these six components respectively correspond to the definitions of business process (BP) [1], business process management (BPM) [11] and business process orientation (BPO) [12]. Consequently, they act as theoretical BPMM components to validate the results. We will examine the prescribed use of IT per component, as well as the IT relationships among the components to jointly achieve higher process maturity. 3 Results The yielded research results are discussed by following the twofold approach as presented in the previous methodology section. 3.1 Overview of Business Process Maturity Models The data collection resulted in 37 BPMMs, of which 13 academic and 24 nonacademic models. The overview is summarized in table 1. Table 1. The overview of academic and non-academic business process maturity models ID Authors Model Ref. (1) Academic AOU Aouad et al. Co-maturation model [13] ARM Armistead et al. BPM s degree of progress [14] DET DeToro et al. BP condition rating model [15] HAM Hammer BP and Enterprise Maturity [16] Model HAR1 Harrington BP maturity grid [1] LEE Lee et al. Value-based BP maturity model [17] MAU Maull et al. BPR maturity model [18] MCC McCormack et al. BPO maturity model [12] ROH Rohloff BP management maturity [19] assessment ROS Rosemann et al. BPM maturity model [8, 20] SKR Skrinjar et al. BPO maturity model [21] SEI SEI, Software Engineering Institute Capability maturity model integration WIL Willaert et al. Holistic BPO maturity framework [22, 23, 24] [25]

690 A. Van Looy Table 1. (Continued) (2) Non-academic BIS Bisnez Management BPM maturity model [26] BPM BPMInstitute State of BPM [27] BPT BP Transformations 8 Omega ORCA [28] Group & BPGroup CAM1 CAM-I BP-based management loop [29] CAM2 CAM-I BPM assessment & [30] implementation road map CHA Champlin BP management maturity model [31] DEL Deloitte Business maturity model & scan [32] ESI ESI, European Software EFQM/SPICE integrated model [33] Institute FAA FAA, Federal Aviation FAA integrated capability [34] Administration maturity model FIS Fisher BP maturity model [35] GAR1 Gardner BP improvement road map [36] GAR2 Gartner BPM maturity & adoption model [37] HAR2 Harmon BP maturity evaluation model [38] IDS IDS Scheer AG BPM maturity check [39] ISO ISO/IEC ISO/IEC 15504 [4, 40] O&I O&i BPM scan [41] OMG OMG, Object BP maturity model [42] Management Group ORA Oracle BPM life cycle assessment [43] survey REM Remoreras BP culture maturity model [44] RUM Rummler-Brache Group BP Performance Index [45] SAP SAP Process maturity analysis [46] SCH Scheer BPM check-up [47] SMI Smith et al. BPM maturity model [48] SPA Spanyi BP competence grid [49] 3.2 Comparison of the Model Components Each table below presents one of the theoretical components. A distinction is made between models that: (1) are IT-neutral and do not mention IT in their road map to achieve higher process maturity, (2) generally suggest IT, e.g. tools, hard- and software or databases, (3) refer to specific technologies, or (4) promote specific tools. Table 2. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding business process modeling IT-neutral (12) General IT (9) Specific IT (5) Specific tools (6) LEE, MCC, SKR, ARM, HAM, AOU, WIL, BIS, ROH, BPM, CAM1, CHA, HAR1, MAU, IDS, SMI O&I, ORA, SAP, DEL, ESI, FIS, ROS, SEI, FAA, SCH GAR1, ISO, OMG, GAR2, HAR2 RUM

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study 691 First, the table above deals with process descriptions, procedures and flowcharting. Processes may be stored in a repository, such as a manual or a database [OMG]. The process architecture provides a hierarchical map of process levels, including value chains, (sub)processes and individual tasks or regional variations [MAU]. Two-third of the BPMMs propose electronic 2D or 3D design to improve maturity, e.g. [AOU]. Tools range from MS Office to advanced formats or BPM Suites, e.g. [ORA]. Examples of modeling languages are given in [BPM], e.g. BPMN and UML. Table 3. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding business process deployment IT-neutral (5) General IT (14) Specific IT (9) Specific tools (3) LEE, CAM2, CHA, ARM, HAM, AOU, WIL, BIS, ROH, BPM, ESI, ISO MAU, ROS, BPT, FIS, SCH SKR, SEI, DEL, GAR2, ORA, FAA, HAR2, REM, SMI IDS, O&I, OMG, RUM, SAP As shown in table 3, the vast majority of BPMMs advise to use IT during deployment. Nonetheless, its extent depends on the strategy and organizational objectives. In general, BPMMs refer to higher maturity with integrated databases, BPM Suites, workflow management systems and the link with a business rules engine for realtime, agile services, for instance [WIL, BIS, GAR2] (cfr. supra). IT architectures are suggested to use ERP, SOA or SaaS, e.g. [ORA, SCH]. Other specific concepts are relational databases [SCH], firewalls [FIS] and back-up tools for recovery [OMG]. Table 4. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding business process optimization IT-neutral (12) General IT (14) Specific IT (6) Specific tools (4) DET, HAM, LEE, ARM, HAR1, AOU, WIL, BIS, ROH, BPM, MCC, CAM2, MAU, ROS, FIS, GAR2, SMI ORA, SCH CHA, ESI, GAR1, SKR, SEI, BPT, ISO, O&I, RUM, CAM1, FAA, SPA HAR2, IDS, OMG, REM, SAP The third component is business process optimization (table 4). Metrics may concern (1) process and business parameters at (2) individual, process or enterprise level. BPMMs often suggest market surveys [FAA], Six Sigma, Lean, Value Stream Mapping, Statistical Process Control and simulation techniques [GAR2, HAR2, ORA, RUM]. KPIs are defined to measure the achievement of process objectives [WIL]. To facilitate reporting on past, present and future performance, most BPMMs use a performance management system, possibly with real-time dashboards and business activity monitoring [CAM1, HAR2, ORA]. For instance, [ROH] and [SCH] mention the ARIS tool as a BPM Suite. Other technologies to improve maturity are business intelligence, customer relationship management and virtual reality [AOU].

692 A. Van Looy Table 5. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding business process management IT-neutral (23) General IT (6) Specific IT (6) Specific tools (2) ARM, HAM, ROS, SEI, FAA, AOU, WIL, BIS, BPM, SCH HAR1, LEE, MAU, O&I, OMG, GAR2, ORA, MCC, ROH, SKR, REM SMI BPT, CAM1, CAM2, CHA, DEL, ESI, FIS, GAR1, GAR2, HAR2, IDS, ISO, RUM, SAP, SPA We now focus on the management of previous components. Table 5 presents all BPMMs that rely on a process owner, who is supported by an improvement team. Among others, the owner is responsible for its resources, e.g. training and skills, and accountable for process performance, such as in [HAM]. He also manages the business rules, aligns with IT and liaises with stakeholders, for instance in [BIS, SEI]. Unlike previous components, most BPMMs are IT-neutral. However, IT may enable knowledge sharing, communication and collaboration through Intranet and Internet, e.g. mailing, portals and Electronic Data Interchange [AOU]. Some models require configuration or document management systems, management information systems and BPM Suites for planning and reporting on higher maturity levels, for instance in combination with the Balanced Scorecard technique [O&I, SEI, FAA]. Table 6. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding the organization s culture IT-neutral (19) General IT (3) Specific IT (3) Specific tools (1) ARM, HAM, LEE, SEI, CAM1, GAR2, IDS, SCH MAU, ROS, WIL, REM BPT, CAM2, DEL, ORA ESI, FAA, FIS, HAR2, O&I, OMG, RUM, SMI, SAP, SPA The previous components are frequently confronted with cultural barriers that impede process excellence. As a result, table 6 lists all BPMMs that contain: (1) attitudes and values for empowerment, innovation and multidisciplinary teamwork, (2) strategy alignment, (3) senior management involvement and (4) rewards. Merely a quarter of the BPMMs recommend IT on higher maturity levels, e.g. for reusing common assets, such as lessons learned, success stories and templates [IDS]. Tools are also presented for planning and controlling strategic KPIs and rewards systems. Infrastructures like e-rooms, Web 2.0 communities or social networks facilitate cross-departmental and cross-organizational collaboration [GAR2, SCH].

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study 693 Table 7. The use of IT in the maturity road map regarding the organization s structure IT-neutral (11) General IT (0) Specific IT (0) Specific tools (1) ARM, HAM, - - SCH MAU, WIL, BPM, CHA, FIS, GAR2, IDS, ORA, REM The last component relates to the organization s structure, which frequently represents a matrix reconfiguration, as an alternative to a vertical or horizontal organogram. Most BPMMs propose a Center of Excellence, process office or council to coordinate process integration. Some BPMMs, such as [HAM], mention additional bodies, for instance a program management office and steering committees. In this case, the Center of Excellence is rather a senior management body than a competence center. Although IT facilitates process integration and collaboration [SCH], table 7 is mostly IT-neutral. Due to the close link with previous components, in particular deployment and culture, no additional IT aspects are covered to improve maturity. 4 Discussion Three findings are drawn from tables 2 to 7. First, most BPMMs do not include all components, e.g. [DET] aims to optimize. Culture and structure are often neglected. Secondly, the components were derived from definitions to validate the results: BP<BPM<BPO. This hierarchy is translated into IT, since IT is most mentioned in the basic components to improve maturity: modeling<optimization<deployment. As a result, IT counts for the higher maturity levels. Typically, process modeling has an IT gradation: no design, manual design, design with MS Office, and BPM Suite design. Thirdly, given this IT impact, we consider that if a BPMM requires IT on higher levels for one basic component, whether it does so for the other basic components. I IT - DEPLOYMENT II I IT - DEPLOYMENT II SKR, BPT, DEL, FIS, OMG, REM, RUM AOU, ARM, HAM, MAU, ROH, ROS, SEI, WIL, BIS, BPM, FAA, GAR2, HAR2, IDS, O&I, ORA, SAP, SCH, SMI HAM, DEL, O&I, RUM AOU, ARM, MAU, ROH, ROS, SKR, SEI, WIL, BIS, BPM, BPT, FAA, FIS, GAR2, HAR2, IDS, OMG, ORA, REM, SAP, SCH, SMI IT-NEUTRAL IT - MODELING IT-NEUTRAL IT - OPTIMIZATION DET, LEE, MCC, CAM1, CAM2, CHA, ESI, GAR1, ISO, SPA HAR1 DET, LEE, MCC, CAM2, CHA, ESI, GAR1, ISO, SPA HAR1, CAM1 IV III IV IT-NEUTRAL IT-NEUTRAL III Fig. 1. The IT relationships among the modeling, deployment and optimization component

694 A. Van Looy Figure 1 shows that most BPMMs have similar IT relationships among the basic components to improve maturity. The majority of models are situated in the second quadrants (fully with IT), and the fourth quadrants (fully without IT). Possible inconsistencies are situated in the first quadrants with models that mention automated deployment without electronic modeling and process engines, nor real-time metrics. However, we must note that those models may either intent to be generic for all organization sizes and types, e.g. [OMG, RUM], or that we didn t have access to all model information to appropriately assess the components in detail, e.g. [DEL]. 5 Future Work All BPMMs will be thoroughly compared with regard to other elements, such as the assessment (AS-IS) and improvement (TO-BE) method. Furthermore, the scope will be broadened towards supply chain integration and collaboration. Additional case studies will be conducted for the most comprehensive models. As introduced, the PhD dissertation will evaluate whether a new model design is appropriate for crossorganizational processes, considering the IT impact per component, e.g. cost-related. Gaps are expected to be identified in respect of a generic model for both products and services, and public and private organizations. Interestingly, multi-level governance or the mandatory collaboration among political levels, may be taken into account. 6 Conclusion This study has compared 37 business process maturity models in respect of their use of IT to achieve higher business process maturity. Most models recommend IT to improve process modeling, deployment and optimization, with manual activities situated on lower maturity levels. IT can also facilitate managerial, cultural and structural aspects. Nevertheless, its extent strongly varies from general IT, to specific IT and specific tools. An organization must choose a maturity model that best fits its strategy and objectives. For instance, larger product organizations may benefit more from automation than smaller service organizations. Consequently, a generic road map is IT-neutral or, at best, general IT-focused. The initial hypothesis is thus partly accepted and broadened towards general IT. Similar to Carr [9], Smith and Finger [10], we agree that IT does not matter, but it enables higher process maturity. References 1. Harrington, H.J.: Process Management Excellence. The Art of Excelling in Process Management. Paton Press, California (2006) 2. Champy, J.: X-Engineering the Corporation. Reinventing Your Business in the Digital Age. Warner Business Books, New York (2002) 3. Smith, H., Fingar, P.: Business Process Management: the Third Wave. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa (2002, 2006)

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study 695 4. ISO/IEC: Information Technology - Process Assessment - Part 7: Assessment of Organizational Maturity - ISO/IEC TR 15504-7:2008(E). ISO/IEC, Geneva (2008) 5. Hüffner, T.: The BPM Maturity Model - Towards a Framework for Assessing the Business Process Management Maturity of Organizations. GRIN, Munich (2004) 6. Lee, J., Lee, D., Kang, S.: An Overview of the Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM). In: Advances in Web and Network Technologies, and Information Management, Huang Shan, China, June 16-18, pp. 279 288. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) 7. Maier, A.M., Moultrie, J., Clarkson, P.J.: A Review of Maturity Grid based Approaches to Assessing Organizational Capabilities. In: Academy of Management Annual Meeting, 8-13 August, Academy of Management, California (2008) 8. Rosemann, M., de Bruin, T.: Application of a Holistic Model for Determining BPM Maturity. BPTrends (February 2005) 9. Carr, N.G.: IT Doesn t Matter. Harvard Business Review 81(5), 41 49 (2003) 10. Smith, H., Fingar, P.: IT doesn t matter-business Processes Do. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa (2003) 11. Gillot, J.-N.: The Complete Guide to Business Process Management. In: Business Process Transformation or a Way of Aligning the Strategic Objectives of the Company and the Information System through the Processes, Booksurge Publishing, South Carolina (2008) 12. McCormack, K., Johnson, W.C.: Business Process Orientation: Gaining the e-business Competitive Advantage. St. Lucie Press, Florida (2001) 13. Aouad, G., et al.: Technology Management of IT in Construction: a Driver or an Enabler? Logistics Information Management 12(1/2), 130 137 (1999) 14. Pritchard, J.-P., Armistead, C.: Business Process Management - Lessons from European Business. Business Process Management Journal 5(1), 10 32 (1999) 15. DeToro, I., McCabe, T.: How to Stay Flexible and Elude Fads. Quality Progress, 55 60 (March 1997) 16. Hammer, M.: The Process Audit. Harvard Business Review, 111 123 (April 2007) 17. Lee, J., Lee, D., Kang, S.: vpmm: a value based Process Maturity Model. In: Roger, L., Gonzu, H., Huaikou, M. (eds.) Computer and Information Science 2009, pp. 193 213. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) 18. Maull, R.S., Tranfield, D.R., Maull, W.: Factors Characterizing the Maturity of BPR Programmes. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23(6), 596 624 (2003) 19. Rohloff, M.: Case Study and Maturity Model for Business Process Management Implementation. In: 7th International Conference, BPM, September, pp. 128 142. Springer, Ulm (2009) 20. de Bruin, T., Rosemann, M.: Using the Delphi Technique to Identify BPM Capability Areas.. In: 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 5-7 December, pp. 642 53. Toowoomba (2007) 21. Skrinjar, R., Bosilj-Vuksic, V., Stemberger, M.I.: The Impact of Business Process Orientation on Financial and Non-financial Performance. Business Process Management Journal 14(5), 738 754 (2008) 22. SEI: CMMI for Development, Version 1.2. Software Engineering Institute (August 2006), Online http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/06tr008.pdf 23. SEI: CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.2. Software Engineering Institute (November 2007), Online http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/07tr017.pdf 24. SEI: CMMI for Services, Version 1.2. Software Engineering Institute (February 2009), Online http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/09tr001.pdf

696 A. Van Looy 25. Peter, W., et al.: The Process-Oriented Organization: a Holistic View. Developing a Framework for Business Process Orientation Maturity. In: 5th International Conference on Business Process Management, 24-28 September, p. 15. Springer, Brisbane (2007) 26. Bisnez Management: Business Process Management Onderzoek 2009-2010 (2010), Online http://www.bisnez.org/files/rapport_bpm_volwassenheid_onderz oek_2009_2010_def.pdf 27. BPMInstitute: 2010 BPM Market Assessment Survey (2010), Online http://2010stateofbpm.surveyconsole.com/ 28. BPT Group: Welcome to 8 Omega v2.0. BP Transformations Group (March 2008), Online http://bptg.seniordev.co.uk/8omega.aspx 29. Dowdle, P., et al.: The Process-based Management Loop. The Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 55 60 (January 2005) 30. Dowdle, P., Stevens, J., Daly, D.: Process-based Management at Work in an Organization (2007), Online http://www.cam-i.org/docs/pbm_at_work_in_an_organization.pdf 31. Champlin, B.: Dimensions of Business Process Change (June 25, 2008), Online https://www.bpminstitute.org/uploads/media/champlin-6-25-08.pdf 32. Deloitte: Het Business Maturity Model (2010), Online http://www.deloitte.com/view/nl_nl/nl/diensten/consulting/ strategy-operations/business-maturity-model/index.htm 33. Ostolaza, E., Garcia, A.B.: EFQM/SPICE Integrated Model. The Business Excellence Road for Software Intensive Organizations. In: International Conference on Product Focused Software Improvement, June 22-24, pp. 437 452 Oulu (1999) 34. FAA: FAA-iCMM, Version 2.0, An Integrated Capability Maturity Model for Enterprisewide Improvement (2001), Online http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ aio/library/ 35. Fisher, D.M.: The Business Process Maturity Model. A Practical Approach for Identifying Opportunities for Optimization. BPTrends (September 2004) 36. Gardner, R.A.: The Process-Focused Organization. A Transition Strategy for Success. ASQ, Quality Press, Milwaukee (2004) 37. Melenovsky, M.J., Sinur, J.: BPM Maturity Model Identifies Six Phases for Successful BPM Adoption. Gartner Research, Stamford (2006) 38. Harmon, P.: Evaluating an Organization s Business Process Maturity. BPTrends Newsletter 2(3), 1 11 (2004) 39. IDS Scheer: BPM Maturity Check (2010), Online http://www.bpmmaturity.com/ 40. ISO/IEC: Software Engineering - Process Assessment - Part 2: Performing an Assessment - ISO/IEC 15504-2:2003(E). ISO/IEC, Geneva (2003) 41. Tolsma, J., de Wit, D.: Effectief Procesmanagement. Procesgericht Sturen met het BPM model. Eburon, Delft (2009) 42. OMG: Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM) - Version 1.0 (1 June 2008), Online http://www.omg.org/spec/bpmm/1.0/pdf 43. Oracle: BPM Lifecycle Assessment (2008), Online http://bpmready.nvishweb.com/ 44. Remoreras, G.: Achieving the Highest Level of Process Culture Maturity ( August 23, 2009), Online http://mysimpleprocesses.com 45. Rummler-Brache Group: Business Process Management in U.S. Firms Today (March 2004), Online http://rummler-brache.com/upload/files/ppi_research_results.pdf

Does IT Matter for Business Process Maturity? A Comparative Study 697 46. Scavillo, M.: Business Process Transformation in the Software Industry (30 June 2008), Online http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/ library/uuid/70559771-c266-2b10-1499-8c36e668e0a6?quicklink= events&overridelayout=true 47. Scheer, A.-W.: BPM = Business Process Management = Business Performance Management (2007), Online http://www.professor-scheer-bpm.com/ 48. Smith, H., Fingar, P.: Process Management Maturity Models. BPTrends (July 2004) 49. Spanyi, A.: Beyond Process Maturity to Process Competence. BPTrends (June 2004)