Implications for Management Control - CiteSeerX

Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- I996

Implementing WorMow

Automation Systems:

Implications for Management Control

Pat Bowe Dept. Of Accounting, Finance & Information Systems University College Cork, Ireland Brian O’Flaherty Dept. Of Accounting, Finance and Information Systems University College Cork, Ireland,

Abstract

Introduction

Automation has revolutionised industry and initiated profound economic change. In the past two decades, manufacturing productivity has seen substantial improvements, yet office productivity has remained practically unaffected. Workflow Automation Systems, a new class of system which focus on automating documentflows, promises to redress this imbalance. This study looks at the implication of adoption of a WorkJlow Automation System and in particular the impact on the managerial control system. The financial service sector is a main adopter of this technology and many such companies are planning future implementation of workflow automation systems. This study sets out to explore the extent of the control features that will be included in the systems and attempts to ascertain the attitude of three groups i.e. users, managers and IT personnel.. Their opinions on the consequenceswhich this would have for the operation of the control process in their organisations were then documented and analysed. The control process model developed by Child (91 proved useful in the classification of process control activities. Following analysis of the research data an amendment to ChildS framework is proposed.

The level of infiltration of automated computer systems in manufacturing is now such that further enhancements to manufacturing processesare becoming less significant, resulting in ,a new focus on the service sectors to improve their efficiencies [21]. Similarly, Reardon [32] has stated that while the last two decades has seen general manufacturing productivity improve by over 90%, office productivity has virtually stood still at 5% over the same period [3], [2I] despite the arguments of Panko [31] that these figures were based on ungrounded assumptions about the nature of office work. This issue has been addressedby the development of information systems which focus on the operation of office operations: workflow automation systems. The basic objective of these systernsis to manage the flow of work around a business so tlhat it is performed quickly and efficiently, ensuring thalt organisational document management is executed reliably and inexpensively [22]. As a result, much of the appeal of workflow automation systemsfor managers lies in the belief that they add this a self-steering layer of intelligence and independence to the process of data distribution [33]. These potential benefits of workflow automation systems have led Sprague [35] to state thalt harnessing information technology to manage documents is one of the most important challenges facing IS managers in this decade.

Keywords Workflow automation systems; organisational document flows; management control process.

1060-3425/96 $5.00 0 1996 IEEE

13

Proceedings of the 1996 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-29) 1060-3425/96 $10.00 © 1996 IEEE

Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences- 1996

Background to Worktlow Systems

Automation

Table 1. Overview of the benefits of workfIow automation systemsidenti$ed by other authors

Workflow automation system applications are relatively recent developments in the information systems field, and thus far literature on these systems has tended to be of a highly practitioner-oriented nature [2], [16]. The primary strength of workflow technology is its capability to elicit great improvement in the efficiency of operation of the processeswhich it automates [20], [22]. The result is that descriptions of issues relating to the productivity elements of workflow software have been well-documented [3], [17], [34]. Research into the elements of the workflow system which do not contribute to this core productivity effect and in particular the impact of control mechanisms integrated into workflow systems and their consequencesfor the operation of the control process, have tended to be overlooked [21]. This study aims to address this imbalance by investigating the consequences of implementing workflow automation systems for the operation of the management control process.

The Appeal of Workflow Systems

Automation

l

The number of steps involved in most processes are dramatically reduced and eliminated, simplifying the entire document processing system

Pa PI. * Parallel instead of sequential processing is supported and parallel tasking abilities may also be included, thus speeding up the workflow process [22], [23]. * A reduced the number of errors which occur in the operation of the process [S], [ 161. o Enhanced customer service due to a higher throughput capability, a reduced possibility of error and the decreasedturnaround times required to perform the same functions [20], [24]. 0 Internal productivity increases of typically 30 to 50% [3], [16]. a Enable the streamlining of quality systems in organisations [3 81. l Training of new personnel and retraining of old personnel on the new systems is made far simpler [31> [341. l

The appeal of worldlow automation systems lies in the often immediate and extensive cost savings which can be made from their introduction [22], [35]. This makes workflow systems quite easy to cost justify in comparison to many other types of information systems [35]. The benefits which can accrue to organisations can be both immediate and long-term, both providing immediate ‘hard’ cost savings, and ‘softer’ benefits in such areas as the quality of services provided and the quality of decisions made. Some of the potential benefits of worMlow automation systems which have been identified in the literature are displayed in Table 1. As a result of these benefits the popularity of workflow automation systems is increasing, with growing numbers of organisations implementing these systems and re-engineering their workflow processes. This has led Charles Babcock [2] to refer to workflow automation as the ‘next killer application on PCs’.

l

Increased flexibility in changing the systems which are currently in place [3]. Significant storage and photocopying cost savings ~241.

The Components of a Workflow System

Automation

The most basic task of a workflow automation system is to automate the business processes which involve the transfer and routing of documents from one person to the next, a task known as programmatic control [24]. Thus worldlow automation systems always start at the level of the individual business process, which is the set of linked activities that take an input and transform it into an output [ 181. There are five basic components which are incorporated in the structure of a workflow system introduced to automate a business process:

14


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996 1. The starting point is the business process which can be automated as it currently exists or improved after analysis; 2. These processes are defined as procedures involving series of tasks which are performed under a variety of conditions. Each execution of a process is called an individual case. Some of these tasks take place in parallel so that rendezvouspoints may be necessaryto collect output from several tasks. A system of deadlines and alarms is usually provided to support the completion of time-critical operations; 3. Participants in procedures perform roles and can be allocated various degreesof authority to coordinate the approval policies of the organisations. There is a means of addressing participants in the system including titles, roles and references to inbuilt organisation structures; 4. Workflow Systems allow access to a wide range of data via a forms processing subsystem which displays documents within folders; 5. There are reporting and managementfacilities which allows management to assess the performance of subordinates through such measures as status reports, performance monitoring tools and audit trails [2 11.

fundamental objectives as identified in models af capitalism

managerial s,ra,sgie* (or,s”,sd to objwtivos such as:

--) t

Adaplon Ofne* technolow -

implsmo”,a,ion within the labour pro~sss

t . reduce costs * i”cra4se Rsxibility cd production !rys,sm - improve qualily . entlancs control)

I EO”,OX, ,prod”a mark‘,,. hbour market. technological knowlsdgs,

(spsoifie sWects on ~ontrot and skill)

i”,srve”i”g proc*sse* and actors (workor and union r*po”**, “.d”.D offu”c,io”* and middle managars. va,u(~s ofwodt organisation dssignsrs)

Figure 1: Representation of the role of managerial strategy @om Child [9]) It has been argued that, historically, new technology has been implemented wherever possible not with the intention of improving the work environment of employees,but that of reducing the dependenceon labour by improving management’sposition of control [ 11, [ 111, 371. This can be traced back to a traditional desire on the part of management to structure subordinates’jobs to as large an extent as is possible in an effort to reduce the uncertainty and hence the stmss level of their jobs [5], [ 121, [41]. Indeed, new technology has been found to be capable of providing a dangerous link between an oppressive managerial strategy and the labour process [lo]. The result is that computer systems tend to instill convergencetowards the management style supported by the system, one which attempts to tighten the control processwhenever possible [l], [5], [29].

Literature on the first four components is readily available [3], [7], [21], [34]. With regard to the fifth component, however, despite worktlow automation systems literature continually including a control component in descriptions of the basic features of such systems,remains largely unresearched.

Whisler [39] has stated that the preference of management seems to be to exercise as much control over the actions of their subordinates as is technologically and economicalllyfeasible. For as long as management seek increased control, new technology will be implemented and used for the purpose of allowing them to improve their control Icapabilities [39]. Child [9] has developed a model for analysing changes in the operation of the control process. This is a six-stage model incorporating two groups of three stages each as depicted in Figure 2. The: first groupings is titled executive instruction and consists of formulating goals, setting tasks and deadlines and monitoring progress towards the achievement of thlosedeadlines. The second grouping is called the feedback side of the model and involves recording, analysing and evaluating the output of employees.

Managerial Strategies and New Technology One of the most obvious changes in the sociostructure of organisations since the early industrial era has been in the introduction of new technology in the workplace and the consequent changes in the relative balance between capital and labour [9]. The four major objectives of management which are prominent in decisions to introduce new technology are to reduce operating costs, to increase efficiency, to secure improvements in quality and finally to facilitate improvements in managerial The introduction of new control [9], [lo], [12]. technology has been identified by a number of writers as an opportunity for management to increase the scope and effectiveness of the control mechanisms available to it [l], [lo], [37]. The execution of such a strategy has been describedby Child [lo] and is depicted in Figure 1.

15


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996 Feedback side feeds back into the Executive Instruction part of the control process, mainly through influencing the goal formulation stage, but also the standard setting phase, thus completing the control process loop [9].

Feedback

Figure 2 The process of management control

The model is structured so that the control process stages necessitating the greatest amount of conceptual tasks are placed at the top of the diagram, with focus gradually shifting towards more operational tasks as one moves down through the stages. Thus the goal formulation and performance evaluation require the greatest amount of management conceptualisation, and the two stages regarding the monitoring of operating behaviour and the recording of output are deemed to be the most operational [9]. in WorMow Systems Research

Deficiencies Executive Instruction The executive instruction part of the model involves those stagesin the control processwhereby the manager’s main task is the provision of information to and guidance of subordinates on the manner in which work is to be completed [9], [27]. The manager is assumed to have certain goals, in terms of work that he/she wishes others to accomplish in a manner which will satisfy or surpass the required levels of performance. These standards or rules may take the form of output targets, instructions or guidelines as to how the task in hand is to be accomplished [9]. Managers oversee their subordinates perform this work in the next step, monitoring performance, with the result of their labour being some form of output. Feedback The feedback part of the control process involves an upward information flow regarding the job performance of employees, focusing on the difference between a system’sdesired outcome and its actual performance [ 191, [25]. The feedback process begins once output of some form has been generated and is directly or indirectly measured and recorded [25]. Once measured, this information is then analysed and evaluated against the desired goals and standards, generally with a strong emphasis on productivity, with results meriting subsequent reward or punishment [9]. This enables managers to assessthe performance of subordinates and to alter, if necessary, either the goals or the methods employed to achieve those goals, or both. Thus the feedback stages consist of a decision-making operation which compares the measured state of the process with the desired conditions and decides how the variables should be manipulated [ 141. The final stage of the


Automation

The primary strength of workflow technology is its capacity to improve the efficiency of processes which have been automated [20], [22]. Research into the elements of the workflow system which do not contribute to this core productivity effect have tended to be ignored [21]. As a result, literature in the area has tended to fall into two categories. The first consists of writers who are concerned with making generalised statements on the potential benefits which can accrue to organisations who are willing to invest in the technology, without grounding these observations in empirical data. This would include Bailey [3], Brierley [7], Dzujna [ 131 and Lavery [22]. The second category is comprised of writers who are concerned with detailing the analysis, design and implementation of a single workflow system, generally one in which the authors have been personally involved. Included in this category are such authors as Benson and Cohen [4], Hurwitz 1171 and Schultz [34]. Although these articles are generally insightful on the design, implementation and operation of workflow systems, there remains a number of issues which have not been tackled by either category of research. As a result of the focus on the efficiency benefits of workflow automation systems,information on the control features of these systems is difficult to locate in the literature. The control elements of workflow systems tend to be mentioned as only a secondary advantage which accrue along with the productivity gains [2], [3]. Actual descriptions of the control features which are enabled by workflow systemstechnology are also notably scarce. Yet studies in other areas of the computer field have indicated that these second-level effects almost always occur with the integration of computer systems into an organisation, often with significant consequences for the operation of the control process [29], [36], [41].

Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996 computerised workflow system,prototype as a means of illustrating the nature of the control features being implemented in workflow automation systems. Sample screensare shown in Figure 3.

Orlikowski [29] found that the introduction of information systems to an organisation can alter the makeup of the management control system in operation. This occurred through changes in the relative combinations of personal control mechanisms, which are implemented through the direct intervention of human actors, and impersonal control mechanisms, which are implemented through utilisation of either the formal, technical or cultural structures of an organisation. This study sought to discover whether changes of this nature were occurring as a result of the implementation of workflow automation systems and, if so, to determine what their consequenceswere for the operation of the management control process.

Design and Implementation Strategy

of a Research

Although control features had been identified as a basic component of a workflow system, previous research has failed to adequately describe the manifestation of this control component [3], [21]. Consequently, it was necessaryto examine the consequencesof the integration of control features in workflow automation systems for the operation of the management control process in organisations. Previous research in other areas of the information systems field has indicated that the introduction of information systemscan act as a agent of change in the control process, increasing organisational dependence on impersonal control mechanisms [29], [39], [41]. As a result, one objective of this study was to determine whether this would be the case with workflow automation systems. Therefore it was desirable that the research be carried out across a number of management levels in a number of organisations, to enable accurate results on the consequences of the implementation of workflow systems to be established. However, because very little of the research conducted in the workflow automation systems area had investigated the consequencesof the integration of a control component into an organisational workflow process, it was also desired that the research strategy used would also allow for the incorporation of qualitative factors. The satisfaction of these two criteria to the selection of a research strategy was achieved through conducting multiple case studies in seven Irish organisations. Interviews were conducted in a semi-structured format, and tools such as interview questionnaires, screen captures and a computer prototype illustrating the control features being integrated in workflow systemswere used to ensure that interviewees in all of the organisations shared the same understanding of the background to the study [40]. A number of pre-test pilot studies had enabled the design, implementation and testing of a

Figure 3: Sample screensfrom the research prototype The selection of suitable research subjects was an important consideration. Both1the organisations and the individuals who were selectedfor the study were required to have some experience in the implementation and operation of workflow automation systems and possess the intention to introduce further systems of this nature in the mture. In this way the validity of interviewee responseswas guaranteed. As a result of these criteria, only financial institutions were used for this study due to the importance of office processes and potentially large impact of workflow automation systems on their method of doing business. Seven institutions were involved in the study, all of which conformed with the criteria that worMlow automation systems would have a significant impact on their method of doing business. It was desired that the knowledge accumulated would be based on the experience of people working at all levels of the organisation. Therefore a minimum of four people were interviewed in each organisation, representing clerical workers, lower level manage:ment, IT staff, and upper level management. This enalbled the development of a profile of the uses to which workflow technology was being put in each organisatio8n. Further details on the interviewees used in the study are given in Table 2. Table 2: Profile of the Interviewees used in the Study

17


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996

The Control Component of Workflow Automation Systems

Setting Subordinate Tasks and Deadlines This stage essentially represents an effort on the part of management to impose boundaries and limits upon the operating behaviour of employees. As a result, the introduction of systemsof formal and technical control to this control process stage have been ongoing in the financial sector for a number of years, due to the potentially damaging consequences of errors in the handling of financial transactions. As regards the setting of subordinate assignments and deadlines, therefore, interview subjects believed that this would continue to become increasingly standardised, and that the operation of this stage would increasingly be incorporated into the workflow system itself These findings were matched by a reduction in the amount of management time deemed necessaryto devote to this activity. The importance of personal methods of setting the standards and deadlines of employee performance were deemed to be, therefore, on the decrease.

The basic role of control features in workflow automation systems seems to be evolving. The criteria which are considered before the introduction of a workflow system have been expanded to incorporate consideration of management control facilities. The variety and scope of these mechanisms of control are also increasing, with the facilities being introduced influencing the operation of the control process more extensively. Consequently, the role of workflow systems is evolving, with growing consideration of its capabilities beyond mere productivity concerns, as the their potential for tightening the control processbecomesrecognised. Previous research in other areas of the IS field had discovered that the implementation of information systems containing a control element can result in increased use of impersonal control mechanisms at the expense of personal methods of exercising control [l], [5], [29], 1411. Overall, the validity of this finding in the area of workflow automation systems was upheld by this It emerged, however, that the expected study. consequencesof the introduction of workflow systemsfor the functioning of each stage of the control process were markedly different. In fact, this study found that changes in the level of formalisation and the extension of technical control mechanisms differed at each stage of the control process. The executive instruction side of the control process was exposed to a greater shift towards standardisation and technical control, with a subsequent reduction in the importance of personal control mechanisms.

Monitoring the Operating Behaviour of Employees Previous researchers had found this stage to be one where the changes in operation may be the most profound. This research study indicated that while a high degree of formalisation would occur at this stage, and a great deal of the responsibility for subordinate monitoring would be transferred to the worldlow system, the estimated decrease in the amount of management involvement in the operation of the monitoring task was relatively small. Managers in Irish organisations believe that the monitoring facilities possessed by workflow systemswill be used largely as a means of improving the operation of personal control as opposed to substituting it. Clerical workers and IT staff, however, believed that tasks in most areas of financial institutions had become so routinised that there was little need for personal Furthermore, the emplacement of supervision. sufficiently stringent standards and computerised monitoring facilities to overseethe operation of this stage was believed to be an entirely suitable method of monitoring the workflow. Clerical workers expressedthe view that developments in the functioning of organizational work flow meant that managers had few tasks to execute in overseeing the operation of this stage of the control process at any rate. IS staff and top management concurred, but many expressed the opinion that lower level managers saw the monitoring task as being central to their role as a manager and therefore did not welcome its replacement by either formal or technical mechanisms of control.

Goal Formulation Activities of Management The goal formulation activities of managers were identified by interviewees as being one of the control process stagesrequiring concentrated human input on the part of the manager, thus confirming the relevance of the design of Child’s [9] model. While this task was being exposed to more in-depth analysis and structuring, its replication or reinforcement within the format of a workflow system was deemed to be limited by most managers and clerical workers. IS staff, however, believed that the automation of goal formulation tasks represented nothing more than another challenge for their skills. In the short term, however, they admitted that although greater standardisation of this stage would occur, it would remain largely an area for direct management control, with limited computerised assistanceor substitution.

18


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996 allow for excessive change in its operation, despite the findings of some of the literature to the contrary [6], [29]. Some degree of standardisation of the procedures involved in the evaluation OSperformance were being manifested in almost all of the organisations studied, together with a minimal increalsein the level of technical control over the tinctioning of this activity. This minor increase in the extent of impersonal control mechanisms influencing the operation of this stage of the control process was expected by top management and IS staff to result in a diminished amount of management involvement in the functioning of the employee evaluation area, although again the changes are not expected to be significant. Management and clerical workers in all of the organisations, however, indicated that they believed that due to its judgmental nature this stage would continue to be dominated by the direct personal control. Therefore they expected the operation of this stage of the control process to continue to be largely based on the personal evaluation of management. And, while IS staff and top management strive to increase the non-managem.ent component of the operation of this task, in the short term they seem resigned to this requirement for the use of direct personal control.

Recording Employee Output At the recording of output stage interviewees generally agreed that formalisation and computer control were more established here, than at any other stage of the control process, as the previous research had indicated [3], [21]. As a consequence,changes in the operation of this stage based on the introduction of newer workflow systems, had been perceived to have a minimal effect on the operation of control over this area. Certainly, research subjects believed changes in the degree of personal control exercised to be a very marginal consideration due to the highly automated and formalised nature of this stage of the control process anyway. However, the levels of formalisation and technical control associatedwith the recording of output are set to increase. This was mainly due to the tighter organisational, national and international standards being implemented by organisations to standardise the operation of their transaction recording procedures. It was believed, therefore, that the need for more extensive recording and backup systems of financial institutions to comply with more demanding sets of standards would result in an increase in the amount of formal and technical controls coming to bear on this stage of the control process.

Interpreting

the Findings

Measurement aud Analysis of Output Increasingly, organisations are seeking to impose more formal structures on the (operationof their workflow processes,but there are limits to the efficiencies which can be achieved through formalisation. Hence there is a certain optimal level of stan.dardisation which can be exercised over any stage of the control process beyond which the feasibility of further formalisation decreases and the focus shifts towards searching for opportunities to replace the standardiseid process with systems incorporating a greater dependence on mechanisms of technical control. Thus, for example, the monitoring of operating behaviour stage had been experiencing growing standardisation, which had begun to level off, while the contribution of technical control mechanisms to its method of operation were expanding at a rapid pace. Thus it seems that an increasing influence of impersonal control mechanisms over the operation of the control process has tended to occur at two stages. In the first stage, a workflow system is introduced and, although management may have to structure and formahse their behaviour to a greater extent to satisfy standards introduced in conjunction with the system, its direct influence on the operation of the control process is limited. At this phase the operation of the control process stagebecomesmore formal, by necessity,in order to comply with the frequently stringent requirements of

Changes in the control process stage involving the measurement and analysis of data was deemed by the interviewees to certainly be noteworthy. Managers had traditionally imposed a large degree of influence over the operation of output measurement and analysis in the functioning of financial institutions. As the variety, speed of completion and complexity of transactions continues to increase, however, standardisation and the automated controls are playing a more important role in measuring and analysing the output of employees. This study uncovered sizable increases in the level of formalisation and a shift towards greater use of technical controls identifiable in the interviews conducted. Interviewees at all levels of the organisation admitted that the process of measurement and analysis of output had been improved considerable with the drive towards increasingly automated workflow systems and that even these marginal changes in the operation of this task were already significantly easing the burden of personal performance of this task by management. Evaluation of Employee Performance The performance evaluation stage was generally perceived by interviewees to be an overly intuitive task to 19


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences- 1996 greater deal of time interacting with clerical staff and exploring information system facilities for what they view as more creative and rewarding work. Overall, the nature of the control task of management was found to be largely shifting towards responding to information contained in the system and accordingly ensuring the compliance of subordinates with the requirements of the system, a shift which is in line with previous research findings [41]. The development of management control systems which operate in this way results in deterioration of the also the manager/subordinate relationship through a perceived reduction in the importance of building networks of trust and communication in the workplace [26].

the system, but the amount of technical control which is brought directly to bear remains relatively small. As the control process becomes more structured and formalised, however, its suitability for replacement by machine control increases. To compound this, as managers become familiar with the capabilities of the workflow system and more confident of empowering it with greater control over the activities involved, and confidence in its role as a direct agent of control increases. The rate at which the formal and technical mechanisms of control which can be incorporated in the workflow system, extend their influence over the functioning of each stage of the control process, depends on the perceived requirement for human involvement and the level of technological maturity of the control features which affect the operation of each individual stage. As the role of computerisation in the operation of each stage of the control process becomes more developed, the extent of influence enjoyed by computers in controlling the functioning of that stage tends to occur concurrently. The extent of impact of the control features integrated in the workflow system on each stage of the control process is expected, therefore, to increase in the future if IT personnel continue to implement their agenda of computerising a greater proportion of the workflow process. Management and clerical workers, however, continue to foresee substantial difficulties with increasing the influence of formal and technical controls over some stages of the control process where extensive human involvement is deemed essential such as the goal formulation and employee evaluation stages of the control process. As management awareness of the capabilities of the control features integrated in workflow systems continues to grow, however, and IT personnel are dedicated to optimising the influence of worldlow systemsin the operation of the control process. As a result of the shit? towards the greater utilisation of impersonal control mechanisms, brought about by the introduction of workflow automation systems, the importance of personal mechanisms of control will diminish. On this point, however, management groups disagreed with both clerical workers and IT personnel on the role of personal control mechanisms in the operation of the control process. From the perspective of both IT personnel and clerical workers the role of personal control mechanisms will continue to diminish in importance in both the short and the long term. In their place, they envisage workflow systems gradually assuming responsibility over the control tasks of management. However, managers as a whole, do not believe that there will be a substantial diminution of the role of personal control mechanisms. Instead, they feel that the responsibilities which are allocated to the workflow system will in fact allow them to spend a

Amending the Control Process Model Child’s [9] model has been used throughout this study to enable investigation of the impact of workllow automation systems on the operation of the control process. Assimilation of the results of the research study with the control process model yield some interesting details as to the nature of operation of each of the six stagesof the control process. Formulating Goals - The results relating to this stage indicate that its operation is still largely dependent on direct management intervention in order to function effectively. Even though some standardisation is expected, it is largely anticipated that any increase in the influence of impersonal methods of control over the operation of this stage of the control process will be marginal. Setting Tasks - The findings relating to this stage of the control process indicate that the degree of standardisation which is being exerted on the operation of this area is increasing and that the influence of technological methods of control over the functioning of this phase is growing. Consequently, it is expected that the amount of task and deadline setting activity over which worlcflow systems will assume control will increase in the near future. Monitoring of Operating Behaviour - This stage of the control process has been the subject of a great deal of speculation in the information systems field, with research predicting that the influence exerted over this stage of the control process by computers would illuminate the operation of subordinates who use the system [21], [29], [30], [41]. The findings of this study indicate that although technology-based control and increased formalisation are coming to bear on this stage of the control process, the impact thus far has been limited and the potential of the technology in this role may be curtailed by a lack of desire on the part of

20


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conferenceon SystemSciences- 1996 management to utilise it. Recording Output - Described as a basic function of workfiow software, recording the output of subordinates had reached a relatively high degree of technological sophistication in workflow systems [20], [21]. Changes in this area were predicted to be of a marginal, though notable nature, with few further shifts in the direction of increased exercise of impersonal control mechanisms expected. Analysing Output - The measurement and analysis of data has been described as one of the basic strengths of information systems 1361. This capability has been incorporated into workflow automation systems in the form of the management reporting capabilities which are being developed. The influence of these capabilities in analysing data generated by workflow processesin Irish financial organisations had been seen as being surprisingly low. This situation is set to change, however, with some degree of standardisation being brought to bear on the means by which information is measured and analysed and the role of the workflow system in performing these functions is also expected to grow at the expense of the utilisation of personal control mechanisms. Evaluation of Output - The final stage of the control process involves evaluating the work which has been completed. This task has been largely performed by management in the past, with little reference to standard procedures and little or no involvement on the part of the workflow system. Although IT personnel were hoping that they could change this situation in the near future, the chances of this occurring in the next couple of years do not appear to be very promising.

Feedback

tmportance

of Impersonal

Control

Figure 4: Amending Child s (9) control process model

Conclusions Overall, the nature of the management control task is expected to change radically with the introduction of workflow systemswhich include control features. Due to the increased dependence on the role of the workflow system in the operation of the control process, the need for compliance with its requirements will be substantially raised, a process being continually driven by the need to conform more closely to national and international standards embedded in their computer systems. The supervisory task of the man,ager is also increasingly becoming a reactive activity, im that to a growing extent it is based on responding ~to information which is highlighted by the workflow system. The result is that electronic supervision is gradually eclipsing the role of human supervision with the ongoing introduction of workflow systems. The movement towards greater dependenceon impersonal mechanisms of control is also diminishing the importance of the manager/subordinate relationship. This is becausethe utilisation of integrated control features is reducing the importance of maintaining strong relationships of trust and communication between managers and their subordinates. Clerical workers, in particular, felt that the importance of a good relationship with the superior was weakening as the necessary levels of trust and communication declined. Management are gaining greater influence over a wider range of subordinates’ activities and are becoming increasingly results-oriented with the introduction of workflow systems containing control features. Clerical staff, meanwhile, will continue to become increasingly distant from their superiors as IT press their agenda of increased personnel standardisation and utilisation of technical control.

Modelling these findings on the control process depicted by Child [9] shows that the influence of impersonal control mechanisms in the operation of the control process seems to moving outwards from the bottom right-hand side of the diagram in an arc, as depicted in Figure 4. This arc symbolises the relative influence of impersonal control mechanisms in the functioning of each stage of the control process. It’s position was found to vary from organisation to organisation, but the trend in workflow systems development seemsto be pushing the arc outwards and to the left. The result is that to an increasing extent the operation of each stage of the control process is being conducted through a combination of impersonal control mechanisms whose evolution and consolidation is facilitated by the workflow system.

21


Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences- 1996

Bibliography

[20]Kimborough, S. and Moore, S.; Message Management Systems: Concepts, Motivations, and Strategic Eflects; Journal of Management Information Systems; Fall 1992.

[l]Aldrich, H. and Mueller, S.; The Evolution of Organisational Forms; Organisational Behaviour, Vol. 4; 1982.

[21]Knight, B.; Workj7ow Management: An Overview; Datapro; October 1993.

[2]Babcock, C.; Go with the flow, Computer-world; April 1993.

[22]Lavery, M.; A Survey of Workflow Management Soflware; Proceedings of the 1992 Document Management Conference; 1992.

[3]Bailey, C.; The Paperless Dream; Network, February 1993. [4]Benson, B. and Cohen, H.; The AT&T Rhapsody Business Orchestration Solution; AT&T Technology; Vol. 5, No. 3; 1991.

[23]Marshak, R.; Keyfile: Bringing Imaging and Workflow to the Desktop; Patricia Seybold’s Office Computing Report, Vol. 14, No. 11; 1991.

[S]Bjorn-Andersen, N. and Pedersen, P.; Computer Facilitated Changes in the Management Power Structure; Accounting, Organisations and Society; Vo1.5, No. 5; 1980.

[24]McCready, S.; There’s more than one kind of Work-flow Software; Computer-world; November 1992.

[6]Bjom-Andersen, N., Eason, K. and Robey, D.; Managing Computer Impact: An International Study of Management and Organisations; Ablex Norwood, 1986.

[;?S]Merchant, K.; The Control Function of Management; Sloan Management Review; Summer 1982.

[7]Brierley, E.; Workflow Today and Tomorrow, Proceedings of the 1993 DocumentManagement Conference; 1993.

[26]Miles, R. and Snow, C.; Organisations: New Concepts for New Forms; California Management Review; Spring 1986.

[8]Cafasso, R.; Workflow next rising star?; Computerworld; March 1991.

[27]Mintzberg, H.; The Structuring of Organisations; PrenticeHall; 1979.

[9]Child, J.; Organisations: A Guide to Problems and Practice; Harper & Row; 1984.

[28]Nieberding, M.; Image Processing of Health Insurance Claims; A4C Journal; March/April 1990.

[lO]Child, J.; Managerial Strategies, New Technology and the Labour Process; In Knights, D., Wilmott, H. and Collinson, D. (eds.); Job Redesign: Critical Perspectives on the Labour Process; 1985.

[29]Orlikowski, W.; Integrated Information Environment or Matrix of Control? The Contradictory Implications of Information Technology; Accounting, Management and Information Technology;Vol. 1, No. 1; 1991.

[l l]Coombs, R.; Automation, Management Strategies, and Labour-Process Change; In Knights, D., Wilmott, H. and Collinson, D. (eds.); Job Redesign: Critical Perspectives on the Labour Process; 1985

[3O]Orlikowski, W.; CASE Tools as Organisational Change; MIS QuarterZy; September 1993 [31]Panko, R.; Is Offrce Productivity Stagnant?; MIS Quarterly; June 1991.

[12]Dawson, S.; Analysing Organisations; McMillan; 1992

[32]Reardon, R.; Essentials of successful corporate electronic mail; Computer Communications; December 1989.

[ 13]Dzujna, C.; Speeding the Workflow With Electronic Forms; The Oflce; June 199 1.

[33]Reinhardt, A.; Smarter E-Mail is Coming; Byte; March 1993.

[14]Evans, R., Impact of computerisation on control; In Forester, T. (Ed.); The Microelectronic Revolution: The complete guide to the New Technology and its impact on Sociev; Oxford; 1980.

[34]Schultz, L.; Computer Programs and Cataloguing: One Innovative Approach; OCLC Micro; Vol. 4, No. 5; 1988. [35]Sprague, R.; Invest in Electronic Document Management Systems; I/S Analyzer, December 1992.

[l S]Hale, D., Haseman, W., and Groom, F; Integrating Islands of Automation; MIS Quart&y; December 1989.

[36]Sprouli, L. and Kiesler, S.; Connections; MIT Press; 1992.

[16]Hale, K.; What is Production Workflow Management Software?; Proceedings of the Document Management Conference; 1993,

[37]Webster, F. and Robins, K.; Information Technology: A Luddite Analysis; Ablex Norwood, 1986.

[ 17]Hurwitz, J.; AT&T’s Rhapsody: Targeting Groupware and Workflow Automation; Patricia Seybold’s O&e Computing Report, Vol. 13, No. 6; 1993.

[38]Wernham, B.; Groupware meets IS0 Programmer, September 1993.

9001; American

[39]Whisler, T.; The Impact of Computers on Organisations; Praeger; 1970.

[ 18]Johansson, H., McHugh, P., Pendlebmy, A. and Wheeler, W.; Business Process Reengineen’ng: Breakpoint Strategies for Market Dominance; Wiley & Sons; 1993.

[4O]Yin, R.; CaseStudyResearch;Sage; 1989.

[19]Kefalas, A.; Global Business Strategy: A Systems Approach; South-Western Publishing Company; 1990.

[41]Zuboff, S.; In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, Heinemamr Professional; 1989.

22
