A Matrix for Context-Aware Business Process Management: Empirical Evidence from Hilti Jan vom Brocke1, Manuel Weber1, Thomas Grisold1 1 University of Liechtenstein, Fürst-Franz-Josef-Strasse, 9490 Vaduz, Liechtenstein jan.vom.brocke@uni.li manuel.weber@uni.li thomas.grisold@uni.li Abstract. We present a framework to classify business processes according to their con- textual management requirements. Our framework results from a real-world project with Hilti, a globally operating company. Following a design science research approach, we identify two key dimensions to classify business processes: variability and frequency. As these two dimensions are present to different degrees, we develop four context clusters in which business processes can be organized: reliability, performance, agility, and inno- vation. Our framework provides several implications for business process management (BPM). It facilitates BPM approaches, which are sensitive towards contextual require- ments and thus, are more likely to be adopted successfully. Specifically, our BPM Con- text Matrix can also be used to plan and scope the implementation of various digital tech- nologies to support and advance BPM in organizations. Keywords: Business Process Management, Context-Aware BPM, Information Technologies, Business Process Taxonomy, Process Mining, Robotic Process Automation. 1 Introduction Our case company, Hilti, is a globally operating company in the construction industry. It develops products, software, and services for customers worldwide. Hilti has intro- duced a process repository based on Microsoft (MS) Sharepoint. Like for many com- panies, however, the adoption of such models as well as their maintenance has proven challenging. Hilti decided to revisit their business process management (BPM) ap- proach considering the state of the art in research. Hilti engaged with the ten principles of good BPM [10] and decided to develop a context-aware approach to manage their business processes. Context-awareness essentially states that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach for the management of processes. This is because business processes have different func- tions and thus, espouse different management requirements [8]. There are numerous advantages to context-aware process management, such as increased process flexibility, better decision-making, and better risk management [8, 25, 30]. We have engaged with Hilti on their journey of revising their global process manage- ment system within a project called ‘GPMS next generation’. We present our ap- proach in the following. The global rollout is planned for 2022. Copyright © 2021 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Com- mons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). 2 2 Situation faced 2.1 Case Description Hilti is a globally operating corporation specialized in construction tools and ser- vices. Employing more than 30’000 people worldwide, the company develops products, services, and infrastructures, mostly in the B2B sector. The headquarters are located in Schaan, Liechtenstein [6]. Hilti implemented a BPM approach many years ago. The founder, Martin Hilti, had envisioned an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system long before this became the standard [6]. In 2018, Hilti has been awarded with the Global Awards for Excellence in BPM & Workflow by the Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC) [4]. Besides a traditional functional organization, Hilti implemented a process organiza- tion and allocated resources to business process management along the BPM lifecycle [14]. To this end, the company specified most of its 149 single processes. The company currently uses a global process management system (GPMS). A pro- cess repository based on MS Sharepoint is used for describing, designing, and dissem- inating process models [16]and information throughout the organization [5] and along the whole BPM lifecycle [14]. 2.2 Problems and Challenges in BPM Despite the strong success of the existing BPM approach, it became apparent that the existing GPMS is being used only to a limited extent. Most of the stored documents have not been accessed or modified in the ways it was envisioned when introducing the system. This entails the risk that processes are executed incorrectly, inadequately, or in an uncoordinated manner as process descriptions might not be accessed or – if accessed – might prove outdated. Furthermore, stakeholders reported that operational staff is seeking for additional process information but lack user experience in finding useful information or documents in the current process repository (database). Also, it was re- ported that the implemented software had been perceived as outdated because it would not align with the expectations of a modern digital work experience. This has led to a rather negative attitude of many employees towards the GPMS and also the BPM ap- proach as a whole. In summary, it can be said that the problem at hand goes beyond merely technical issues. The main reason lies in the limited user experience with the existing tool, which is based on a "simple" process repository that does not account for various capability areas in BPM, such as governance, use of new digital technologies, and new methods [26] along the whole BPM lifecycle [14]. Specifically, we identified the following problems: • ‘One-size-fits-all’ approach: Most business processes are modeled, visualized, and described in one and the same way, predominantly using traditional mod- eling languages (e.g., BPMN). Different process requirements are hardly or not at all considered in the modeling and description. 3 • Outdated information and low access rates: More than two-thirds of the docu- ments containing useful insights were not uploaded or modified within the last two years. Moreover, most of them are seldomly opened. • No ‘single source of truth’: Some functional areas have implemented addi- tional systems providing useful and valuable insights for users. Data is scat- tered across various systems and repositories, increasing the risk of incon- sistent process information. • Missing functionality: The current GPMS is set up as a stand-alone repository and has several shortcomings regarding its features and functionalities, which are relevant for efficient process work. These problems point to issues with respect to the existing BPM approach. To solve these problems, the company recognized the need for a new approach to guide their BPM initiatives. Given that processes have different contextual requirements, we initi- ated a project where we explicitly accounted for context-awareness around business process work. 2.3 Project Goal: Development of a Context-Aware BPM Approach We decided to design a new BPM approach that is based on context-awareness. Building on taxonomies that were developed to operationalize and measure the organ- izational context [30, 31], we set out to (1) pinpoint the relevant context at Hilti, (2) identify project clusters, and (3) propose cluster-specific guidelines to manage the pro- cesses. It has been decided to showcase and evaluate the approach focusing on process descriptions (i.e., models, documentation, visualization) and the associated process documents (e.g., attachments such as technical documentation, standard operating pro- cedures, manuals/instructions, forms, and templates). To this end, we embraced context-aware process descriptions, which were not con- sidered before. This means that processes can be described in different ways depending on their contextual requirements. Accordingly, processes are modeled, stored, and rep- resented differently unless they share very similar contextual needs. This approach should also account for the fact that different stakeholders with different requirements access this application/platform to acquire existing or updated process knowledge. While working with the company on the context-aware process descriptions, it al- ready became apparent that the context-aware approach would be of use beyond revis- ing the methods for process descriptions. The project team realized that context-aware- ness affects the entire BPM approach. Using the BPM Billboard [9], we also investi- gated what management recommendations would apply in each of the clusters, refer- ring to the BPM capability areas [13, 26]. As one important outcome, the company envisioned that our approach can inform and guide the implementation of new digital technologies; accordingly, we ensured that our approach can inform the selection of digital technologies, such as process mining and robotic process automation, by ac- counting for the contextual needs of the processes. 4 3 Action taken Our project has been following a design science research (DSR) approach [15], where we closely collaborate with process experts in the company to obtain first-hand knowledge about contextual requirements [2]. Following vom Brocke et al. [7], the key motivation of any DSR-project is to generate design knowledge, which in our case was design knowledge in the form of a new artifact: the BPM Context Matrix. In the fol- lowing, we briefly outline the actions taken. More details regarding the methodological procedure can be found in Weber et al. [29], vom Brocke et al. [4], and [11]. 3.1 Kick-Off In 2019, we first developed a joint understanding of the problem together with the man- agement. We informally discussed the case with the Chief Information Officer (CIO) as well as with the Head of Operational Excellence. We then presented our vision of a next-generation BPM approach at the semi-annual meeting of all global process owners (GPOs), who have strategic responsibility for individual processes or process areas. We emphasized the principles of purpose, context-awareness, technology appropriation, and simplicity [10, 12]. There was agreement that these four principles are important and should drive the development of a new BPM approach. In addition, there was consensus that the key to such a new approach is to detail to operationalize context-awareness. Once we knew distinct types of contexts at Hilti, we could – for each context type – focus on the pur- pose (and requirements), identify the most appropriate technology, and deliver the pur- pose in the most simple and effective way. Hence, we decided to emphasize context- awareness within this project. 3.2 The Survey In the next stage, we conducted a company-wide global survey in order to assess the contextual factors of all business processes at Hilti. We approached Global Process Owners (GPO), Global Process Managers (GPM), and Regional / Local Process Man- agers (R/LPM) of the case company: 42 process experts were asked to specify the pro- cess(es) they are responsible for [29]. The survey was based on the contextual process dimensions as proposed by vom Brocke et al. [8]. We slightly adapted these dimensions and included additional factors that were considered important by key informants in the organization: standardization, creativity, variability, interdependence (human interaction, process steps), knowledge- intensity. 3.3 Expert Workshops and Task Force Subsequently, we conducted a workshop and several individual meetings with GPOs and the CIO to make sense of the survey data. Three researchers from the University of 5 Liechtenstein and three employees from Hilti’s Department for Operational Excellence formed the core team (the task force). We held weekly heads-up meetings as well as topic-specific ad-hoc meetings and brainstorming sessions. The overarching goal of this task force was to identify the needs underlying different process types, understand the impact of different contextual factors, and jointly develop an overall process approach that considers contextual factors and integrate them under one overarching BPM ap- proach. Occasionally, we engaged operational clerks to obtain feedback on the usefulness and limitations of our context-aware approach for specific business processes. The re- sults were then presented and discussed with the CIO/GPO community, which formed the steering board for this project. 4 Results developed so far 4.1 Development of the BPM Context Matrix The following Fig. 1 shows the (survey-)evaluation of the six process-dimensions across all 41 main processes. The survey participants rated these contextual process- dimensions using the 7-point Likert-scale. In specific, we see that each process has different characteristics with regards to the context dimensions. Fig. 1. Overview of the six dimensions among the analyzed processes. We created a single figure for each process. This allowed us to find similar or iden- tical properties across business processes with respect to these six dimensions. We de- veloped a spider diagram for each process showing how the respective process has been evaluated according to all dimensions. We printed each spider diagram on a separate sheet and conducted a card-sorting exercise together with all GPOs at the CIO/GPO 6 meeting. Fig. 2 shows two randomly selected spider diagrams we printed for the work- shop. We asked the participants to form groups on the grounds of similar spider dia- grams. Importantly, we did not reveal the names of the processes (as this would bias the perception of the process) but only numbers. We had four groups of 3-4 GPOs working in parallel, and we subsequently discussed the groupings they came up with. The card sorting exercise demonstrated the actual differences of processes regarding contextual needs. At the same time, we recognized the potentials for grouping or clus- tering the processes with respect to similar properties. Interestingly, while the groups worked independently, they all converged towards similar groupings. We used these groups, then, to find key dimensions, which would serve best to distinguish the pro- cesses regarding the relevant context. Fig. 2. Exemplary processes, evaluated using the six context process dimension [8] Dimensions. Based on the groupings, we discussed which dimensions were most sali- ent to distinguish process types. Together with the management of the company, we agreed on two key dimensions: variability and frequency. Variability is expressed as the degree to which a process can or should respond to internal and external dynamics [15, 23]. We observed that some process groups need variability (e.g., a R&D process, which differs according to the goal, timeline, and peo- ple involved). Other processes such as those prevailing in Audit and Finance should not be variable at all. The second dimension, frequency, reflects how often the process is carried out [21]. We observed that some processes are performed often, and others are performed once per month or year. Process executions are more similar when they often occur [17]. Audit and finance processes, for example, need to conform to some defined standard in contrast to R&D processes, which by their nature tend to occur rather rarely but usually deviate from detailed guidelines and standards. Context clusters. By using a combination of two dimensions (variability and fre- quency), we developed a 4-quadrant matrix. We refer to this as the BPM Context Ma- trix. Each quadrant represents a process cluster that contains processes with comparable characteristics (‘identical nature’) as well as the number of runs. We have assigned 7 intuitive names to these process clusters (as shown in Fig. 3): Performance, Innovation, Reliability, and Agility. In the following, we will exemplify our ideas, but we would like to note that such processes occur in almost every organization. Performance Cluster: Processes of high frequency and low variability. This cluster is about processes which are performed very often (high frequency). Each performance should be carried out in one pre-defined way (low variability). Consider a production process. Ideally, the outcome of such a process is always the same, and the way of production (production process) usually does not change. Innovation Cluster: Processes of low frequency and high variability. Processes that belong to the Innovation Cluster require a high degree of creativity [3]. Much of what happens in these processes cannot be anticipated or prescribed. These processes occur rather rarely (low frequency). However, if such innovation processes are executed, they usually run differently after each iteration (high variability). An example of this is the design of a new product or service, which usually involves a high degree of creativity. Since the outcome of such processes is usually uncertain and not clear in detail from the beginning, they exhibit a high degree of variability. However, the frequency with which such processes are performed is rather low. Reliability Cluster: Processes of both low frequency and low variability. This cluster is about processes which are performed very rarely (low frequency). When they are performed, however, the execution should be more or less the same (low variability). Consider the preparation of a tax return. This process is typically always structured in the same way and is usually carried out once a year. Consistency and reliability are key, not only for reasons of compliance but also to ensure that information is integrated when it is needed. The preparation of a tax return can be mentioned here as an example. Since tax returns usually have to be filed once a year (low frequency) and are usually always done in the same way (low variability), this type of process can be assigned to the Reliability Cluster. Agility Cluster: Processes of both high frequency and high variability. In the Agility Cluster, we find processes that run frequently (high frequency) and, at the same time, exhibit a strong potential to deviate across process executions (high variability). We assume that we often have to deal with complex issues in the Agility Cluster. One ex- ample is the talent acquisition process. The way in which new employees are acquired may be similar in its basic steps, but the exact implementation varies depending on the applicant (the talent) and the open position. 8 High Innovation Agility Variability Reliability Performance Low Low Frequency High Fig. 3. BPM Context Matrix. Impact of process clusters. For each cluster, we identified the key challenges for man- aging these processes. Thereby, we clarify what is most critical in both running and managing processes as part of a specific context cluster. We then mapped our insights against the BPM capability framework [13, 26]. Table 1 gives examples for all context types and all capability areas. These preliminary results and insights were obtained through close collaboration between researchers and key stakeholders from the com- pany. Table 1. Description of the process cluster according to six core elements in BPM [26]. PERFORMANCE AGILITY INNOVATION RELIABILITY • Keep people motivated • Enable people • Find innovative solutions to • Ensure knowledge transfer Key • Manage efficiently and • Be sensitive and adaptive for largely unknown challenges • Improve by incorporating new Challenge the first time right change • Focus on effectiveness insights • Orient towards efficiency • Consider the number of • Be aware of the uniqueness of • Act result-oriented according Strategic alignment KPIs variants and the process time the solution to measures like time, budget, quality • Constantly monitor roles • Reduce variability to a • Question the status • Appoint expert groups and responsibilities favorable level • Involve experts and their • Appoint a Center of Governance • Take instant network Excellence (CoE) countermeasures • Standardize process steps • Use decision models • Apply a stage-gate and cook- • Use checklists Methods • Deploy reference cases book approach • Utilize best practices • Standardize applications • Deploy an event-based • Promote knowledge • Make use of workflows and • Automate processes architecture management templates Information whenever and wherever • Deploy specific functional • Deploy collaboration tools Technology possible apps • Apply and pursue a project management approach • Employ reliable and hard- • Focus on continuous learning • Look for and encourage • Challenge existing processes working people • Apply an agile approach problem-solving skills • Set the focus on rapid • Enable and promote agile People implementation solutions • Enable and encourage “out-of- the-box” thinking • Stick to the standard • Enable a functioning and • Give and receive feedback • Establish an “Excellence • Establish a disciplined inspiring teamwork • Commit to the extraordinary Culture” Culture and continuously improving environment 9 4.2 Adapting the Framework for the Selection of New Digital Technologies Our BPM Context Matrix does not only enable the management of business processes according to their contextual requirements. It can also inform and guide the selection of relevant digital technologies, such as process mining and robotic process automation (RPA). Fig. 4. enlists requirements for digital technologies to ensure that the process is running as desired. We assert that digital technologies need to fulfill different func- tions and provide different affordances, depending on the contextual requirements of a respective business process. We sketch out implications for each cluster below. Complexity Management Support System Project Management Support System • Monitor variability • Apply creative problem solving and • Continuously measure process data design methods as well as tools High • Review and take measures • Document only on stages • Document two levels: • Apply project management systems Innovation Agility standard (constrains) and variability • Apply messaging systems • Apply process analytical methods Variability Automation Management Support System Knowledge Management Support System Reliability Performance • Automate the process Low • Make use of check lists (“yellow pages”) • Review and revise annually • Reduce to essential documentation • Document based on log data • Apply knowledge management systems Low Frequency High • Apply workflow management systems • Apply process analytical methods Fig. 4. Framework for the Selection of New Digital Technologies. Performance Cluster: For this cluster, we envision IT-enabled automation of pro- cesses in order to make processes more efficient and effective. Since these processes occur very often, and given they are supported through multiple digital technologies, we typically have extensive event logs. Hence, process mining is a suitable digital tech- nology, which can be used to ensure conformance and efficiency [18]. Furthermore, robotic process automation can be useful to automate recurrent steps in the process execution [1]. Innovation Cluster: We do not consider it necessary to document detailed steps of a process belonging to the Innovation Cluster. This would also restrict the process users in their creative work. An example can be a product design process where designers take new actions which respond to the specific needs of a given project [27]. Support can be provided by means of project management or messaging systems, which afford knowledge sharing and process transparency, as well as social media [24, 28] and web- conferencing tools [19]. Reliability Cluster: For processes belonging to the Reliability Cluster, we see the necessity to provide the users or employees only relevant process information (as far as its execution is concerned). The documentation should therefore be available in a com- pact and easy-to-use form. Knowledge management systems or simple checklists could be used to support the process stakeholders as effectively as possible. Agility Cluster: For processes belonging to the Agility Cluster, we recommend man- aging their complexity (especially the variability factor) to be able to intervene at an 10 early stage. This is because such complex processes are usually difficult to manage and adapt once they have been started. Similar to the performance cluster, these processes also occur very frequently (high frequency). Hence, process analytics methods and tools can also be used here. 5 Lessons learned Lesson Learned (1): The process experts in our case company reported that the es- tablished and old approach was of limited use. Our BPM Context Matrix provides more support and acceptance within the company's internal BPM organization. They now see the BPM Context Matrix (Fig. 3) as a map and guidance for their process modeling activities. In addition, they use it as an internal tool to communicate, plan and coordi- nate BPM initiatives. It is important to note that our framework results from the work of a single company. Arguably, this limits the generalizability of our framework. However, after using this framework in several other projects with different companies, we report that the process clusters are suitable for many other organizations, too. This is because the process clus- ters are organized in a way that any kind of business process can be assigned. Lesson Learned (2): Digital technologies have been playing an important role for BPM. They provide emerging opportunities to improve and innovate business process work [22]. It often seems that companies want to select digital technologies (such as RPA or process mining) because they are popular. What is often overlooked is that such technologies need to respond to the specific requirements of a process [18]. Otherwise, there is a high chance that these technologies fall into oblivion. Our framework provides a pragmatic yet empirically grounded means to select and/or design digital technologies that support business process work in the most suitable way. From this point of view, our framework is not only helpful for the case presented herein but also for any other organization which wants to capitalize on the potentials associated with various digital technologies. Lesson Learned (3): In the context of this university-industry project, we were able to identify two motives for the implementation of a (new) context-aware BPM ap- proach: (3 a) Some companies are subject to external (international) standards. We strongly advise that only those process events and issues should be included within process mod- els and descriptions, which are absolutely necessary. We advocate starting modeling ‘minimally inversive’ processes, which are minimally viable for the time being and meet the basic needs of all stakeholders. Hence, with this new BPM approach, we want to promote an appropriate balance between the minimum requirements from a regula- tory perspective and the necessary requirements from a practical perspective. (3 b) Although the advantages of such a context-aware BPM matrix outweigh the disadvantages, this approach should only be seen as an offer for all process stakeholders to align and coordinate their BPM initiatives and projects. Moreover, the process stake- holders should only accept this new approach to model processes context-aware if they 11 can see a benefit in doing so. This also increases the acceptance of the involved people of these conceived (context-aware) solutions and considerations. Acknowledgments This research has profited from funding provided by the European Union within the Erasmus+ program [2019-1-LI01-KA203-000169], “BPM and Organizational Theory: An Integrated Reference Curriculum Design”. References 1. van der Aalst, W.M.P. et al.: Robotic Process Automation. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60, 4, 269–272 (2018). 2. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Accumulation and Evolution of Design Knowledge in De- sign Science Research - A Journey Through Time and Space. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 21, 3, 520–544 (2020). 3. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Bridging the gap between enterprise content management and creativity: A research framework. Presented at the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2010). 4. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Design Science Research for Maximum Practical Relevance - Dancing Through Space and Time. In: Rohner, P. et al. (eds.) Engineering the Transformation of the Enterprise - A Design Science Research Perspective. Springer Nature Switzerland AG (in press). 5. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Future work and enterprise systems. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60, 4, 357–366 (2018). 6. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Global Processes and Data: The Culture Journey at Hilti Corporation. In: vom Brocke, J. and Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 2: Strategic Alignment, Governance, People and Culture. pp. 539–558 Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2010). 7. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Introduction to Design Science Research. In: vom Brocke, J. et al. (eds.) Design Science Research. Cases. pp. 1–13 Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020). 8. vom Brocke, J. et al.: On the role of context in business process management. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 36, 3, 486–495 (2016). 9. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Planning and Scoping Business Process Management with the BPM Billboard. In: vom Brocke, J. et al. (eds.) Business Process Management. Cases. Springer (2021). 10. vom Brocke, J. et al.: Ten Principles of Good Business Process Management. Bus. Process Manag. J. 20, (2014). 11. vom Brocke, J. et al.: The BPM Context Matrix - A Framework for Context- Aware Business Process Management (BPM). BPTrends. Class Notes: BPM Re- search and Education, (2021). 12. vom Brocke, J., Grisold, T.: Erfolgreich Digitalisieren – Ansätze für ein modernes Prozessmanagement. Controlling. 32, S, 102–107 (2020). 13. vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M.: Business Process Management. In: Cooper, C.L. 12 (ed.) Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. pp. 1–9 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK (2015). 14. Dumas, M. et al.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer Ber- lin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2018). 15. Feldman, M.S., Pentland, B.T.: Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change. Adm. Sci. Q. 48, 1, 94–118 (2003). 16. Frank, U. et al.: The Research Field “Modeling Business Information Systems”: Current Challenges and Elements of a Future Research Agenda. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 6, 1, 39–43 (2014). 17. Goh, K.T., Pentland, B.T.: From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Acad. Manage. J. 62, 6, 1901–1929 (2019). 18. Grisold, T. et al.: Adoption, use and management of process mining in practice. Bus. Process Manag. J. 25, 6, (2021). 19. Hacker, J. et al.: Virtually in this together–how web-conferencing systems enabled a new virtual togetherness during the COVID-19 crisis. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 29, 5, 563–584 (2020). 20. Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design Research in Information Systems. Springer US, Boston, MA (2010). 21. Lillrank, P.: The Quality of Standard, Routine and Nonroutine Processes. Organ. Stud. 24, 2, 215–233 (2003). 22. Mendling, J. et al.: Building a Complementary Agenda for Business Process Man- agement and Digital Innovation. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 29, 208–219 (2020). 23. Mertens, W., Recker, J.: How store managers can empower their teams to engage in constructive deviance: Theory development through a multiple case study. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 52, 101937 (2020). 24. Richter, D. et al.: Internet Social Networking - Distinguishing Phenomenon and Practical Manifestation. Presented at the Proceedings of the 17th European Con- ference on Information Systems, Verona, Italy (2009). 25. Rosemann, M. et al.: Contextualisation of business processes. Int. J. Bus. Process Integr. Manag. 3, 1, 47 (2008). 26. Rosemann, M., vom Brocke, J.: The Six Core Elements of Business Process Man- agement. In: Brocke, J. vom and Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. pp. 107–122 Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidel- berg (2010). 27. Seidel, S. et al.: Pockets of creativity in business processes. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 27, 1, 415–436 (2010). 28. Simons, A. et al.: Enterprise crowdfunding: foundations, applications, and re- search findings. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 61, 1, 113–121 (2019). 29. Weber, M. et al.: Context-Aware Business Process Modelling: Empirical Insights from a Project with a Globally Operating Company. In: ECIS 2021 Proceedings. (2021). 30. Zelt, S. et al.: A Theory of Contingent Business Process Management. Bus. Pro- cess Manag. J. 25, 6, (2019). 31. Zelt, S. et al.: Development and validation of an instrument to measure and man- age organizational process variety. PloS One. 13, 10, (2018).