| Abstract [eng] |
The aim of this Master's thesis is to identify the influence levels of critical success factors (CSFs) on the successful implementation of new processes within business process management (BPM) and to explore how these factors interact. The research pursued four main tasks: 1. Evaluate scientific publications to identify the critical success factors that determine a successful business process management implementation. 2. Determine a methodology for identifying the influence level of critical success factors on the process implementation within business process management. 3. Based on the methodology, evaluate how identified critical success factors influence each other and what level of influence they have on new process implementation within business process management. 4. Interpret empirical data to make conclusions and recommendations. The study began with a comprehensive literature review which revealed a core set of CSFs that appear consistently across various BPM studies: top management support, strategic alignment, communication, performance measurement, organizational culture and information technology. Despite being widely cited, prior research has not adequately examined the extent to which these factors influence one another during specific stages of BPM particularly the new process implementation phase. To address this gap, the DEMATEL (Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation 64 Laboratory) methodology was chosen as it enables the mapping of direct and indirect influence relationships among interrelated variables. Eighteen experts in new process implementation participated in the empirical study providing pairwise comparisons of the six CSFs. The responses were analyzed using DEMATEL to produce a total relation matrix, allowing each factor’s influence and dependence to be quantified. The analysis found that top management support was the most influential factor with a strong net influence over others. Communication was revealed to be a central, balanced factor, both shaping and being shaped by other CSFs. Strategic alignment and organizational culture were more reactive, reflecting the influence of leadership and communication. Performance measurement acted as a stabilizer, promoting transparency and improvement while information technology had a limited directional role, functioning primarily as an enabler once other conditions were met. Differences emerged in how these CSFs were perceived based on respondents’ organizational roles and tenure. Directors emphasized strategic alignment and leadership while specialists placed greater importance on IT and performance metrics. Managers offered a more balanced view, highlighting the importance of communication alongside leadership support. Respondents with longer tenure viewed top management support as increasingly critical whereas less experienced participants highlighted technological and operational factors. These patterns indicate that CSF prioritization should be tailored to roles and experience within the organization. Based on these insights, several practical recommendations are proposed: organizations should ensure active involvement of top management in shaping and communicating process initiatives; communication strategies must be multidirectional and continuous; strategic alignment should be addressed early through joint planning; performance metrics should be developed in parallel with process design and IT systems should only be deployed once process clarity is achieved. This research contributes to existing BPM literature by offering a more granular and stage specific understanding of how CSFs function in practice. While limited by its sample size and scope, the study demonstrates the utility of DEMATEL for examining interdependencies among success factors. Future research should expand the scope across industries and BPM lifecycle stages. |
