Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
For the whole CoIN, CoIN-IQ has particular function for the integration of services
within IESE's knowledge management activities: (a) They are used to define the point
in the business processes execution where services (like knowledge acquisition or
access to sources) are performed. (b) They describe the usage of services and
knowledge management activities themselves (e.g., like project touch down analyses).
The content and infrastructure is created and maintained by the CoIN team, a team
of scientists working for CoIN on a part-time basis. The CoIN team either performs
those activities themselves, or distributes them among other IESE members. The latter
will gain even more importance when the indiGo system is running, since the CoIN
team will ensure that the result of the discussions are (a) used to improve the process
model or (b) analyzed and appropriate lessons learned distilled from them.
4.2.1
Objectives of CoIN-IQ
The objectives of CoIN-IQ can be positioned according to four criteria: (1) The
purpose of process models, (2) the origin and (3) usage of the process models, and (4)
the modeling techniques. In summary, CoIN-IQ uses structured text describing
empirical and theoretical process models to be executed by human agents. This is
detailed in the following.
For the general purpose of process models, Curtis, Kellner, and Over (1992)
identify five different categories: Facilitate human understanding and communication,
support process improvement, support process management, automate process
guidance, and automate execution. According to this classification scheme, CoIN-IQ
fits into the first category of facilitating human understanding and communication:
The processes are executed by human agents (i.e., IESE members), based on the
process description. Supporting and enforcing process execution beyond this human-
based approach (e.g., by workflow modeling and enactment as in Maurer and Holz
(1999)) was regarded as non-suitable for the purposes of IESE due to the creative
nature of its business processes. Furthermore, processes according to the process
models are executed rather infrequently (< 10 times per month), therefore (a)
automation of the processes was not supposed to leverage a high cost/benefit and (b)
tracking of process status can be done by asking the responsible process executor. In
addition, the experience made with the Electronic Process Guide (EPG) (Becker-
Kornstaedt & Verlage 1999) showed that web-based process descriptions are a
feasible way of distributing process knowledge within creative environments such as
software business. In particular, changes to web-based process models can be
communicated much quicker than paper-based process models, thus enabling quick
integration of experience.
The origin of process models can be empirical (i.e., based on actual processes
(Bandinelli, Fugetta et. al 1995)) and theoretical (i.e., reflecting a planned process
execution). Process models in CoIN-IQ have both origins: Some of the process
models reflect well-established processes (like, e.g., the administrative project set-up),
others represent new procedures (e.g., the reflection of recent changes in the
organizational structure of IESE).
The usage of process models can be descriptive (i.e., a description of a process) or
prescriptive (i.e., intended to be used as an instruction for process execution). The
process models within CoIN-IQ are prescriptive with different degrees of obligation.
In general, administrative procedures (e.g., project accounting) have to be followed
