The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-7154.htm
Maturity models in business
FIM Research Center Finance and Information Management,
University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany, and
Jens Poppelbuß and Jorg Becker
European Research Center for Information Systems, University of Munster, ¨
Purpose – Maturity models are a prospering approach to improving a company’s processes and business process management (BPM) capabilities. In fact, the number of corresponding maturity models is so high that practitioners and scholars run the risk of losing track. This paper therefore aims to provide a systematic in-depth review of BPM maturity models. Design/methodology/approach – The paper follows the accepted research process for literature reviews. It analyzes a sample of ten BPM maturity models according to a framework of general design principles. The framework particularly focuses on the applicability and usefulness of maturity models. Findings – The analyzed maturity models sufﬁciently address basic design principles as well as principles for a descriptive purpose of use. The design principles for a prescriptive use, however, are hardly met. Thus, BPM maturity models provide limited guidance for identifying desirable maturity levels and for implementing improvement measures.
Research limitations/implications – The authors are conﬁdent that this review covers the majority of publicly available BPM maturity models. As the number of corresponding maturity models seems to be constantly growing, exhaustiveness can hardly be guaranteed. The study’s results stimulate future research. Inter alia, adopters from industry require more elaborate support by means of ready-to-use and adaptable instruments for maturity assessment and improvement. The paper also reafﬁrms the need for maturity model consolidation in the ﬁeld of BPM. Originality/value – As existing literature reviews focus on process improvement or BPM in general, the paper’s ﬁndings extend current knowledge. They also increase transparency. Its results provide guidance for scholars and practitioners involved in the design, enhancement, or application of BPM maturity models. Keywords Business process management, Business process management capabilities, Maturity models, Review, Process management, Modelling
Paper type General review
Business Process Management
Vol. 18 No. 2, 2012
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
At the latest since Hammer and Champy’s (1993) Manifesto for Business Revolution, the management and improvement of business processes are core tasks of organizational design (Becker and Kahn, 2010; Buhl et al., 2011; Gartner, 2010; Sidorova and Isik, 2010; Trkman, 2010; vom Brocke et al., 2011; Wolf and Harmon, 2010). Among the various approaches that support business process management (BPM), maturity models receive increasing attention (BPM&O, 2011; Bucher and Winter, 2010; de Bruin et al., 2005). This is in line with the general popularity of maturity models across a wide range of application domains (Weber et al., 2008; de Bruin et al., 2005), the expected increase in adoption by industry (Scott, 2007), and the growing academic interest in such models (Becker et al., 2010).
Maturity models typically include a sequence of levels (or stages) that form an anticipated, desired, or logical path from an initial state to maturity (Becker et al., 2009; Gottschalk, 2009; Kazanjian and Drazin, 1989). An organization’s current maturity level represents its capabilities as regards a speciﬁc class of objects and application domain (Rosemann and de Bruin, 2005). Maturity models are used to assess as-is situations, to guide improvement initiatives, and to control progress (Iversen et al., 1999). In the BPM ﬁeld, two types...
References: Becker, J. and Kahn, D. (2010), “The process in focus”, in Becker, J., Kugeler, M. and
Benbasat, I., Dexter, A.S., Drury, D.H. and Goldstein, R.C. (1984), “A critque of the stage
hypothesis: theory and empirical evidence”, Communications of the ACM, Vol
BPM&O (2011), Status Quo Prozessmanagement 2010/2011 Cologne.
Bucher, T. and Winter, R. (2010), “Taxonomy of business process management approaches”,
in vom Brocke, J
Buhl, H.U., Roglinger, M., Stockl, S. and Braunwarth, K. (2011), “Value orientation in process
management: research gap and contribution to economically well-founded decisions in
Cooper, C.M. and Hedges, L.V. (1994), “Research synthesis as a scientiﬁc enterprise”,
in Cooper, C.M
Curtis, B. and Alden, J. (2007), “Maturity Model du Jour: A Recipe for Side Dishes”, available at:
pdf (accessed 19 May 2011).
de Bruin, T. (2009), “Business process management: theory on progression and maturity”, PhD
thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.
de Bruin, T. and Rosemann, M. (2007), “Using the Delphi technique to identify BPM capability
areas”, paper presented at 18th Australiasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS),
de Bruin, T., Rosemann, M., Freeze, R. and Kulkarni, U. (2005), “Understanding the main phases
of developing a maturity assessment model”, paper presented at Australasian Conference
DeToro, I. and McCabe, T. (1997), “How to stay ﬂexible and elude fads”, Quality Progress, Vol. 30,
Fisher, D. (2004), “The business process maturity model – a practical approach for identifying
opportunities for optimization”, available at: www.bptrends.com/publicationﬁles/10%
19 May 2011).
Fraser, P., Moultrie, J. and Gregory, M. (2002), “The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in
assessing product development capability”, paper presented at IEEE International
Gartner (2010), “Leading in times of transition: the 2010 CIO Agenda”, available at: http://
drishtikone.com/ﬁles/2010CIOAgenda_ExecSummary.pdf (accessed 4 June).
Gottschalk, P. (2009), “Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government”, Government
Information Quarterly, Vol
Gregor, S. and Jones, D. (2007), “The anatomy of a design theory”, Journal of the Association of
Information Systems, Vol
Hammer, M. (2007), “The process audit”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 111-23.
Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993), Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business
Revolution, Harper Business, New York, NY.
Harmon, P. (2004), “Evaluating an organization’s business process maturity”, available at:
20Harmon.pdf (accessed 19 May 2011).
Harmon, P. (2007), Business Process Change, Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA.
Harmon, P. (2009), “Process maturity models”, available at: www.bptrends.com/publicationﬁles/
spotlight_051909.pdf (accessed 26 May 2011).
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004), “Design science in information systems
research”, MIS Quarterly, Vol
Inaganti, S. and Aravamudan, S. (2007), “SOA maturity model”, available at: www.bptrends.
(accessed 19 May 2011).
Iversen, J., Nielsen, P.A. and Norbjerg, J. (1999), “Situated assessment of problems in software
development”, Database for Advances in Information Systems, Vol
Kamprath, N. and Roglinger, M. (2011), “Okonomische Planung von
Prozessverbesserungsmaßnahmen – Ein modelltheoretischer Ansatz auf Grundlage
Kazanjian, R.K. and Drazin, R. (1989), “An empirical test of a stage of growth progression model”,
Management Science, Vol
King, J.L. and Kraemer, K.L. (1984), “Evolution and organizational information systems:
an assessment of Nolan’s stage model”, Communications of the ACM, Vol
Kuznets, S. (1965), Economic Growth and Structure, Heinemann Educational Books, London.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document