Value Assessment of Enterprise Content Management Systems: A Process-oriented Approach

  • J. vom Brocke
  • A. Simons
  • C. Sonnenberg
  • P. L. Agostini
  • A. Zardini


Organisations are facing an incredibly increasing amount of content to be efficiently captured, organised and archived. As a result, Enterprise Content Management (ECM) has emerged as a top business priority during the past years. However, only a few academic reports present common guidelines for evaluating and justifying the choice for a certain ECM solution in terms of economic benefits. This paper is based on the perception that such guidelines particularly should take an organisation’s business process structure into account, since an ECM adoption causes significant changes in work procedures. Consequently, we consider an established business process-oriented framework for profitability analysis of IS and apply it to the context of ECM. An application example serves as an illustration of the concept.


Business Process Information System Capital Budget Corporate Level Discount Cash Flow 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Frank, U. and H. Schauer (2001) Potentiale und Herausforderungen des Wissensmanagements aus Sicht der Wirtschaftsinformatik, Schreyögg, G. (ed.) Wissen in Unternehmen: Konzepte – Maßnahmen – Methoden, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin, 163–164, in German.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    vom Brocke, J., Simons, A. and Cleven, A. (2008) A Business Process Perspective on Enterprise Content Management – Towards a Framework for Organisational Change, Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Information Systems, Galway, Ireland.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tyrväinen, P., Päivärinta, T., Salminen, A. and Iivari, J. (2006) Characterizing the evolving research on enterprise content management, European Journal of Information Systems, 15(6): 627–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    O‘ Callaghan, R. and M. Smits (2005) A Strategy Development Process for Enterprise Content Management, Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems, Regensburg, 1271–1282.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reimer, J.A. (2002) Enterprise Content Management, Datenbanken Spektrum, 2(4): 17–35.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rockley, A., Kostur, P. and Manning, S. (2003) Managing Enterprise Content: A Unified Content Strategy, New Riders, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith, H.A. and J.D. McKeen (2003) Developments in Practice VIII: Enterprise Content Management, Communications of the AIS, 11(33): 1–26.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davenport, T.H. and L. Prusak (2000) Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage what they know, 2nd Edition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Päivärinta, T. and B.E. Munkvold (2005) Enterprise Content Management: An Integrated Perspective on Information Management, Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICCS’05), IEEE Computer Society, Big Island, HI, USA.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    vom Brocke, J. (2007) Service Portfolio Measurement, Evaluating Financial Performance of Service-Oriented Business Processes, International Journal of Web Services Research (IJWSR), 4(2): 1–32.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    vom Brocke, J., Sonnenberg, C. and Thomas, O. (2008) Towards an Economic Justification of Service Oriented Architectures. Measuring the Financial Impact, Proceedings of the 14th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seitz, N. and M. Ellison (2004) Capital budgeting and long-term financing decisions, 3rd Edition, Gale Group, Farmington Hills, MI.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shapiro, A.C. (2004) Capital Budgeting and Investment Analysis, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grob, H.L. (1993) Capital Budgeting with Financial Plans, an Introduction, Galber, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gartner Group (2003) A Report and Estimating Tool for K-12 School Districts: Why Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Matters, Gartner, Inc, Stamford, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    vom Brocke, J., Mendling, J. and Recker, J. (2008) Value-Oriented Process Modelling. Towards a Financial Perspective on Business Process Redesign. Proceedings of the 14th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sapp, R.W., Crawford, D.M. and Rebischke, S.A. (1998) Activity – Based Information for Financial Institutions, The Journal of Bank Cost and Management Accounting, 3(2): 53–62.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. vom Brocke
    • 1
  • A. Simons
    • 1
  • C. Sonnenberg
    • 1
  • P. L. Agostini
    • 2
  • A. Zardini
    • 3
  1. 1.University of LiechtensteinVaduzLiechtenstein
  2. 2.Università Cattolica di MilanoMilanoItaly
  3. 3.Università di VeronaVaduzItaly

Personalised recommendations