Skip to main content

Mapping Business Transformation in Digital Landscape: A Prescriptive Maturity Model for Small Enterprises

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Well-Being in the Information Society. Fighting Inequalities (WIS 2018)

Abstract

Developing versatile modern ICT is an insurmountable challenge to many small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Resources, such as skills, money, time [1] and knowledge [2], are scarce [3]. This makes the selection and decision of any development project a key business issue. The most important questions for SMEs are (i) where to start and (ii) what to change. While there are hundreds of descriptive maturity models for organizational development [4, 5], these offer little support for organizational decision-making. We developed a prescriptive maturity model that maps a subjective snapshot of the maturity of a business, and identifies the most promising objects for next development steps. This Business Transformation Map has three interrelated maturity dimensions: business, technology, and social, that span across past, present and future. We used the model in several test cases, and our results show that the model makes business dimensions visible in a way that makes sense to SMEs. The interviewed SME companies state that depicting company maturity levels in this manner brings clarity to overall business growth options, and it helps transforming this understanding into concrete development steps.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Jones, O., Macpherson, A., Thorpe, R., Ghecham, A.: The evolution of business knowledge in SMEs: conceptualizing strategic space. Strateg. Change 16, 281–294 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Holsapple, C.P., Joshi, K.D.: An investigation of factors that influence the management of knowledge in organizations. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 9, 235–261 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Atherton, A.: The uncertainty of knowing: an analysis of the nature of knowledge in a small business context. Hum. Relat. 56(11), 1379–1398 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., Pöppelbuß, D.W.I.J.: Developing maturity models for IT management. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 1(3), 213–222 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Röglinger, M., Pöppelbuß, J., Becker, J.: Maturity models in business process management. Bus. Process Manag. J. 18(2), 328–346 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nguyen, T.H., Newby, M., Macaulay, M.J.: Information technology adoption in small business: confirmation of a proposed framework. J. Small Bus. Manag. 53, 207–227 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ribbers, P., Parker, M.M.: Designing information technology governance process: diagnosing contemporary practices and competing theories. In: Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Bruin, T., Freeze, R., Kaulkarni, U., Rosemann, M.: Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS), 30 November–2 December (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kumar, K., Van Dissel, H.G., Bielli, P.: The merchant of Prato-revisited: toward a third rationality of information systems. MIS Q. 22(2), 199–226 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schumacher, A., Erol, S., Sihn, W.: A maturity model for assessing industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP 52, 161–166 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Igartua, J.I., Retegi, J., Ganzarain, J.: IM2, a maturity model for innovation in SMEs. IM2, un Modelo de Madurez para la innovación en PYMEs. Dirección y Organización 64, 42–49 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tuomisto, A., Kaukola, J., Koskenvoima, A.: Sensitive development of work systems – the story of dandelions. In: Conference paper: Information Systems Research Seminar Scandinavia (IRIS) 38 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chatzoglou, P.D., Diamantidis, A.D., Vraimaki, E., Vranakis, S.K., Kourtidis, D.A.: Aligning IT, strategic orientation and organizational structure. Bus. Process Manag. J. 17(4), 663–687 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang, Q., Cao, M.: Business process reengineering for flexibility and innovation in manufacturing. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 102(3), 146–152 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Škrinjar, R., Trkman, P.: Increasing process orientation with business process management: critical practices. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 33(1), 48–60 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bergman, B., Klefsjö, B.: Quality from Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction, 3rd edn. Studentliteratur AB (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Looy, A.: Does IT matter for business process maturity? A comparative study on business process maturity models. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6428, pp. 687–697. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16961-8_95

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Albliwi, S.A., Antony, J., Arshed, N.: Critical literature review on maturity models for business process excellence. In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pöppelbuß, J., Röglinger, M.: What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general design principles for maturity models and its demonstration in business process management. In: ECIS 2011 Proceedings, p. 28 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marangunić, N., Granić, A.: Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 14(1), 81–95 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Legris, P., Ingham, J., Collerette, P.: Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 40(3), 191–204 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jansen, R.J.G., Curşeu, P.L., Vermeulen, P.A.M., Geurts, J.L.A., Gibcus, P.: Information processing and strategic decision-making in small and medium-sized enterprises: the role of human and social capital in attaining decision effectiveness. Int. Small Bus. J. 31(2), 192–216 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hernández-Carrión, C., Camarero-Izquierdo, C., Gutiérez-Cillán, J.: Entrepreneurs’ social capital and the economic performance of small businesses: the moderating role of competitive intensity and entrepreneurs’ experience. Strateg. Entrep. J. 11, 61–89 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bititci, U.S., Garengo, P., Ates, A., Nudurupati, S.S.: Value of maturity models in performance measurement. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53(10), 3062–3085 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fabio, L.O.: Knowledge management barriers, practices and maturity model. J. Knowl. Manag. 18(6), 1053–1074 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Khatibian, N., Hasan gholoi pour, T., Jafari, H.A.: Measurement of knowledge management maturity level within organizations. Bus. Strategy Ser. 11(1), 54–70 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Boughzala, I.: A Community Maturity Model: a field application for supporting new strategy building. J. Decis. Syst. 23(1), 82–98 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tarhan, A., Turetken, O., Reijers, H.A.: Business process maturity models: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 75, 122–134 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. van der Hoorn, B., Whitty, S.J.: The project-space model: enhancing sensemaking. Int. J. Manag. Proj. in Bus. 10(1), 185–202 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Heimo, O.I., Kimppa, K.K., Nurminen, M.I.: Ethics and the inseparability postulate. In: Proceedings of Ethicomp (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Deming, W.E: Elementary Principles of the Statistical Control of Quality: A Series of Lectures (1950)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juhani Naskali .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Naskali, J., Kaukola, J., Matintupa, J., Ahtosalo, H., Jaakola, M., Tuomisto, A. (2018). Mapping Business Transformation in Digital Landscape: A Prescriptive Maturity Model for Small Enterprises. In: Li, H., Pálsdóttir, Á., Trill, R., Suomi, R., Amelina, Y. (eds) Well-Being in the Information Society. Fighting Inequalities. WIS 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 907. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97931-1_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97931-1_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97930-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97931-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics