Overcoming the Innovator’s Dilemma in Disruptive Process Innovation Through Subject Orientation

  • Albert Fleischmann
  • Werner Schmidt
  • Christian Stary
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10271)

Abstract

Once digital technologies trigger business process management and change, organizations are challenged to (re)position their products and services. Thereby, creating disruptions could help overcoming the threat of being blindsided by novel developments. We consider Subject-oriented Business Process Management being capable to create socially acceptable organizational disruption through process modelling and explorative execution. S-BPM capabilities adjust changes in customer, product and organizational management through its unifying communication perspective. In this contribution, we report on creating disruptive innovation starting with subject-oriented re-design of work and production processes. The presented case, a large transformation process of an automotive company reveals that this type of disruptiveness enables an integrative perspective on existing work procedure in an aligned, since synchronized way. Hence, we can conclude that a starting point for innovation is grasping the collaborative nature of existing processes rather re-establishing functional positions and procedures.

Keywords

Subject-oriented business process management Innovation Disruptive development 

References

  1. 1.
    Christensen, C.: The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business Review Press, Brighton (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Christensen, C., Raynor, M.: The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Obermeier, S., Börger, E.: Subject-oriented Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: S-BPM in the Wild: Practical Value Creation. Springer, New York (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Neubauer, M., Stary, C.: S-BPM in the Production Industry: A Stakeholder Approach. Springer, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: Subject-Oriented BPM = socially executable BPM. In: Proceedings IEEE 15th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), pp. 399–407. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clark, B., Wheelwright, S.: Organizing and leading heavyweight development teams. Calif. Manag. Rev. 34, 9–28 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berghaus, M.: Luhmann leicht gemacht. Böhlau (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christensen, C., Raynor, M.: Creating and sustaining successful growth. The innovator’s solution, Soundview Executive Book Summaries, 25(11) Part I, pp. 1–8. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jensen, B., Koch, M.: Mensch und Maschine: Roboter auf dem Vormarsch; Folgen der Automatisierung für den Schweizer Arbeitsmarkt, Deloitte AG, Zurich (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aronow, S., Burkett, M., Nilles, K., Romano, J.: The Gartner Supply Chain Top 25 for 2016. Gartner, Stamford (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Allmer, T., Sevignani, S., Prodnik, J.A.: Mapping approaches to user participation and digital labour: a critical perspective. In: Fisher, E., Fuchs, C. (eds.) Reconsidering Value and Labour in the Digital Age. DVWS, pp. 153–171. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London (2015). doi:10.1057/9781137478573_9 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith, A.: The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Pengiun, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: A primer to subject-oriented business process modeling. In: Stary, C. (ed.) S-BPM ONE 2012. LNBIP, vol. 104, pp. 218–240. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-29133-3_14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gao, P., Hensley, R., Zielke, A.: A road map to the future for the auto industry, McKinsey Report 2014 (2014).http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/a-road-map-to-the-future-for-the-auto-industry. Accessed 2017
  16. 16.
    IBM Center for Applied Insights, Digital disruption and the future of the automotive industry (2017).http://www-935.ibm.com/services/multimedia/IBMCAI-Digital-disruption-in-automotive.pdf. Accessed Jan 2017
  17. 17.
    The Reactive Manifesto,(v1.1), 23 September 2013. http://www.reactivemanifesto.org/#the-need-to-go-reactive. Accessed Jan 2017
  18. 18.
    Fichtenbauer, C., Fleischmann, A.: Three dimensions of process models regarding their execution. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Subject-oriented Business Process Management, p. 7. ACM (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albert Fleischmann
    • 1
  • Werner Schmidt
    • 2
  • Christian Stary
    • 3
  1. 1.InterAktiv UnternehmensberatungPfaffenhofenGermany
  2. 2.Technische Hochschule IngolstadtIngolstadtGermany
  3. 3.Johannes Kepler UniversityLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations