Information Systems Management, 25: 113120

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1058-0530 print/1934-8703 online
DOI: 10.1080/10580530801941504
UISM

Critical Success Factors in Business Performance

ManagementStriving for Success
Critical Success Factors in Business Performance Management

Thilini R. Ariyachandra and Mark N. Frolick

Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

Abstract Today, organizations recognize the value of business performance management (BPM) as a
way of attaining strategic alignments and as a means of effectively creating and implementing business
strategy. Yet, many still struggle in implementing a BPM solution that is enterprise focused and that
enables strategic alignment. This article presents a framework for BPM and discusses the major critical
success factors that will influence the success of a BPM initiative.

Keywords Business Performance Management, Critical Success Factors, Strategic

alignment, Performance Management Framework

Business performance management (BPM) is a topic in

the BI arena that is receiving a great deal of attention. In
fact, it was recently ranked as one of the top ten technology trends that CIOs should have on their radar. According to AMR Research, North American companies will
spend $23.8B in 2007 on BI and BPM (Consultant-News,
2007). BPM provides a means of combining business strategy and technological structure to direct the entire organization towards accomplishing common organizational
objectives.
The importance of aligning IT strategy with business
strategy to successfully face the hypercompetitive market
place has been well established (Henderson & Venkatraman, 1992; Luftman, 2003b). However, organizations continue to struggle in their efforts to achieve this strategic
alignment. While several methodologies for alignment
have been proposed, few have actually succeeded. BPM is
a methodology that systematically approaches attaining
and maintaining this strategic alignment. While BPM is
an amazing methodology for the alignment of strategy,
many organizations stumble is their quest to properly
implement BPM. There are a variety of reasons for BPM
failure including, lack of management support, management resistance, a lack of clearly defined objectives, and
infrastructure issues, to list just a few.
To help ensure BPM success, there are several critical
success factors (CSFs) that should be considered. While
some of them pertain to all information systems
Address correspondence to Thilini R. Ariyachandra, 3800 Victory
Parkway, Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio 452073212, USA.
E-mail: tariyacha@yahoo.com

development initiatives, others are unique to BPM implementations. The purpose of this article is to provide organizations with an understanding of BPM and its
potential value. First, BPM is introduced and a BPM
framework is described. Next, we examine the critical
success factors (CSFs) that are important to consider
when striving for a successful BPM implementation

Business Performance Management

Business performance management is one of the hottest
topics in industry today. In fact, Gartner forecasts that
BPM investments will grow to approximately $2 billion
by 2010. Forrester Research predicts even more aggressive BPM spending. They project that BPM software sales
will be $2.7 billion by 2009 (Whiting, 2006).
There is, however, still much confusion as to what
BPM really is. While some view BPM as a narrow concept
that applies to planning, scheduling, and budgeting
practices, others discuss it in the context of legislation
such as Sarbanes-Oxley. The confusion is further
compounded by the fact that BPM is also known and
identified by other names such as corporate performance
management and enterprise performance management.
BPM can be described as a series of business processes
and applications designed to optimize both the development and the execution of business strategy (Frolick &
Ariyachandra, 2006).
BPM involves two primary tasks. First, it facilitates the
creation of strategic goals. Secondly, it supports the subsequent management of the performance to those goals.
113

114

Ariyachandra and Frolick

Strategic goals are developed by stipulating specific

objectives and key performance indicators that are meaningful to the organization. The objectives and indicators
are then associated with operational metrics and linked
to performance incentives.
Although many use the terms synonymously, business
performance management is distinctly different from
business intelligence. BI is the technological solution
that enables a company to consolidate and leverage the
vast masses of data in organizations to improve decisionmaking (Clayton, 2005). BI provides the IT infrastructure
and applications required to implement BPM. BPM is a
business process that leverages BI (Miranda, 2004).
Most BI implementations have a narrow scope limited
to one or more departments, while BPM has a much
broader scope that is focused on the entire enterprise.
While they are two distinct concepts, vendors are blurring the lines of solutions that integrate both BI and BPM
(Blansfield, 2006). The vendors that are beginning to play
in this space conceive of a holistic approach to BPM. The
BPM framework presents this holistic approach in terms
of four distinct key processes. The framework, which
describes the issues, conditions, and assumptions in BPM
implementations and outlines steps for launching BPM
initiatives is described next.

The BPM Framework

The BPM framework is composed of four core processes
(Frolick and Ariyachandra, 2006). They are: (1) strategize,
(2) plan, (3) monitor and analyze, and (4) take corrective
action (Figure 1). The first two steps represent the formulation of business strategy while the last two steps define
how to modify and execute strategy. This closed loop
process captures business strategy, then translated it into
strategically aligned business operations.
Strategize describes a course of action employed to
identify business strategy, to discover key value drivers
required to attain strategy, and to generate metrics to

Strategize

Take Corrective
Action

Plan

Monitor and
Analyze

Figure 1.

The BPM framework.

measure business performance over time. However, generating performance measures that are tied to strategic
value drivers can be challenging. Organizations often
struggle to identify metrics that accurately capture
progress on organizational goals.
By establishing metrics that are linked to business
strategy, the strategize step shapes the activities in each
step of the BPM framework that follow. As such, it is by
far the most important step in any BPM initiative.
Planning describes developing a program of action
on how to carry out the business strategy. This step
allows managers within different business units to set
goals, design projects, and develop budgets to support
corporate strategy.
The business units create plans that target the
achievement of the metrics established in step one. As
such, plans describe how each business unit will contribute to the corporate performance objectives. This requires
each business unit to maintain an enterprise wide focus
during the planning process. Business units must work
together in areas where there is overlap to ensure that
individual plans do not contradict.
Monitor and analyze facilitates the monitoring of
performance results against benchmark metrics. This
step helps evaluate individual and business unit performance. In addition, it enables users to drill down to
detailed information so that they can take appropriate
action.
The course of action prescribed in this step is
supported by both BI infrastructure and analytics. BI
infrastructure provides broad horizontal scope to raise
the BPM analytical perspective above the narrow view of
separate data silos by cutting across application domains
and subject data areas. In so doing, BPM analytics gains
the historic depth as well as the subject area breadth
provided by BI infrastructure.
Taking corrective action constitutes taking timely,
appropriate action to make changes in performance
issues that are uncovered during the monitoring and
analysis phase of the framework. In addition to alerting
users about potential problems, activities in this step
provide users with guidelines and suggestions as to how
to deal with problem situations.
The BPM framework presents the four building blocks
and an approach by which performance management
can optimize value to the organization. Yet effective
performance management has become a major issue for
companies striving to achieve a competitive edge. All too
often, performance management initiatives are ineffective in helping the organizational to achieve its strategic
goals. Some fail to maximize on the opportunities for
ramping up performance management because of inappropriate tools and methods. Awareness of critical
factors that influence BPM deployment will help to
ensure the success of a BPM initiative.

Critical Success Factors in Business Performance Management

Critical Success Factors for BPM Success

While BPM is widely recognized as a means of achieving
strategic alignment and an efficient approach to developing and executing strategy, effective deployment of
performance management solutions is challenging.
There are multiple solutions, methodologies, and tools
hawked by vendors in the field. In addition, all too often
organizations focus on the financial measures of performance management limiting their ability to gain a comprehensive view of strategy development and execution
(Schiff, 2007).
The trade press provides anecdotes and opinions of
industry experts that describe factors that are critical to
the successful implementation of a BPM solution. The
academic literature also points to many factors that may
influence the success of BPM. While these outlets
present a plethora of possible issues and critical success
factors that an organization should consider when
embarking on a BPM effort, they offer limited guidance
on which factors are most significant for a BPM effort.
Table 1 presents the results of a comprehensive assessment of the practitioner and academic literature to
identify the most salient critical success factors for business performance management. Each of the factors
presented in the table describes a unique criterion or
strategy that would help successfully launch and
develop a BPM solution.

Champion
One of the first essential factors touted by industry
authorities and stressed in the academic literature is
the presence of a committed, energetic project champion. The project champion actively supports and
promotes the BPM project often providing information,
material resources, and political support (Jensen &
Sage, 2000). Generally, a visionary and politically savvy
executive, the champion often evangelizes the BPM
solution selling its value to the entire organization. He
or she especially builds support among key senior
executives and CXOs to secure funds needed for the
project.

Management of Resistance
Management of resistance to BPM is another factor that
is critical to a BPM project. An effective BPM solution
allows no one within the organization to hide his or her
performance or maintain silos of proprietary information. It gives various stakeholders across divisions and
different organizational levels access to the same

115

metrics and information at the same time without any

report massaging. As a result, accessing the right data
and metrics to achieve true transparency through a
BPM implementation can require navigating difficult
political issues. Because a successful BPM solution can
expose internal problems, it can be torpedoed by internal politics and resistance (Gruman, 2004). Various
organizational groups may resist the implementation
of true transparency and attempt to protect their own
turfs of interest. Awareness of such resistance would
enable the organization to take corrective action early
and deter a major obstacle to implementation. A strong
team of management support is often required to
impose a culture of sharing across the organization
(Hartlen, 2004).

Management Support
Widespread support for the project from the upper management team is essential for the life of a BPM project
(Griffin, 2004). Gaining consensus and buy-in from senior
management early on in the effort can help establish
legitimacy and visibility for the project. Leadership and
strong support from the C-level executive team can help
subdue resistance and build a firm wide shared vision for
the BPM solution. Their commitment and support can
help sustain funding for the entirety of the project as
well as help in the creation and communication of critical metrics of interest to assess performance management (Politano, 2007).

Sufficient Resources
Resources required for a BPM effort include monetary
resources, people, and time. Effective BPM solutions span
the entire organization and require the implementation
of integrated data management infrastructure such
as data warehouses. Such infrastructure projects can
be very expensive, time consuming and resource intensive (Wixom & Watson, 2001). Past studies indicate a negative effect between the lack of sufficient resources and
system development projects.
However, the availability of abundant resources such
as plentiful monetary resources does not directly translate to greater project success. A recent study suggests
that a small team of business and technical people who
are highly motivated and charged with the mission of
delivering quick wins operating on a shoestring budget
can be more effective than BPM projects that enjoy bountiful resources (Eckerson, 2006). As such, managing the
BPM project with the right balance of sufficient
resources is essential to its success.

116

Ariyachandra and Frolick

Table 1.
Critical Success Factor

Critical Success Factors for Business Performance Management

References

1. Champion

Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2006.
Fui-Hoon, F., Nah. K., and Zuckweiler, M. ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers Perceptions of Critical
Success Factors International Journal of Human Computer Interactions. 16(1), 522, 2002.
Jensen, A., Sage, A., A Systems Management Approach for Improvement of Organizational Performance
Measurement Systems. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 2(1), 2000.
Nah, F., Lau, J., and Kuang, J. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems.
Business Process Management Journal, 7, 285296, 2001.
Reich, B., and Benbasat, I., An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing the Success of
Customer-Oriented Strategic Systems Information Systems Research, 1(3), 2000.
Wixom, B. and Watson, H. An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing
Success MIS Quarterly, 25(1) 1741, 2001.

2. Management of
Resistance

Frolick, M. and Ariyachandra, T.R. Business performance management: One truth. Information
Systems Management, 23(1), 4148, 2006.
Gruman, G. CPM software: an elegant way to measure business indicators. InfoWorld, October 08, 2004.
Hartlen, B. Playing politics: debunking the myths that block a successful BPM implementation,
Business Performance Management, June 2004.
Poon, P., and Wagner, C. Critical success factors revisited: success and failure cases of information
systems for senior executives Decision Support Systems 30(1), 393418, 2001.

3. Management
Support

Biehl, M. Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 2007.
Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2006.
Fui-Hoon, F., Nah. K., and Zuckweiler, M. ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers Perceptions of Critical
Success Factors International Journal of Human Computer Interactions. 16(1), 522, 2002.
Guimaraes, T., Igbaria, M., and Lu, M., The Determinants of DSS Success: An Integrated Model,
Decision Sciences, 23(2), 1992.
Havenstein, H. Data governance, Exec buy-in are keys to BI adoption. Computerworld, 40(40), 2006.
Korogodsky, A. Moving toward alignment, Bests Review, 104(9), 67, 2004.
Politano, T. Master data management: A key enabler for CPM. February 18, 2007, http://www.tdwi.org/
info.aspx?id=33659.
Nah, F., Lau, J., and Kuang, J. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems.
Business Process Management Journal, 7, 285296, 2001.

4. Sufficient
Resources

Biehl, M.Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM,
50(1), 2007.
Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2006.
Ein-Dor, P., Segev, E. Organizational context and the success of management information systems
Management Science, 24(10), 1978.
Wixom, B. and Watson, H. An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing
Success MIS Quarterly, 25(1) 1741, 2001.

5. Team Skills

Fui-Hoon, F., Nah. K., and Zuckweiler, M. ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers Perceptions of Critical
Success Factors International Journal of Human Computer Interactions. 16(1), 522, 2002.
Wixom, B. and Watson, H. An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing
Success MIS Quarterly, 25(1) 1741, 2001.

6. User Support

Biehl, M. Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 2007.
Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2006.
Guimaraes, T., Igbaria, M., and Lu, M. The Determinants of DSS Success:An Integrated Model,
Decision Sciences, 23(2), 1992.
Guggenheim, R. and Wadhwa, S. Sophisticated analytical tools help fuel successful disease
management. Managed Health Executive, 16(2), 6263, 2006.
Shin, B. An exploratory investigation of system success factors in data warehousing, Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, 4, 141168, 2003.
Wixom, B. and Watson, H. An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing
Success MIS Quarterly, 25(1) 1741, 2001.
(Continued)

Critical Success Factors in Business Performance Management

Table 1.
Critical Success Factor

117

(Continued)
References

7. Effective
Communication

Biehl, M. Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM,
50(1), 2007.
Chan, Y., Sabherwal, R., and Thatcher, J. Antecedents and Outcomes of Strategic IS Alignment: An
Empirical Investigation, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(1), 2006.
Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey: John
Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2006.
Fui-Hoon, F., Nah. K., and Zuckweiler, M. ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers Perceptions
of Critical Success Factors International Journal of Human Computer Interactions. 16(1), 522, 2002.
Lee, G. and Pai, J. Effects of organizational context and inter-group behavior on the success of strategic
information systems planning: an empirical study Behavioral and Information Technology, 22(4), 2003.
Hirschheim, R. and Sabherwal, R. Detours in the path to strategic information systems alignment,
California Management Review, 44(1), 87108, 2001.
Jensen, A., Sage, A. A Systems Management Approach for Improvement of Organizational Performance
Measurement Systems. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 2(1), 33, 2000.
Nah, F., Lau, J., and Kuang, J. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems,
Business Process Management Journal, 7, 285296, 2001.
Politano, T. Master data management: A key enabler for CPM, February 18, 2007, www.tdwi.org/
info.aspx?id=33659.

8. Clear Link
to Business
Strategy

Biehl, M. Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 2007.
Frolick, M. and Ariyachandra, T.R. Business performance management: One truth. Information Systems
Management, 23(1), 4148, 2006.
Fui-Hoon, F., Nah. K., and Zuckweiler, M. ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers Perceptions
of Critical Success Factors International Journal of Human Computer Interactions. 16(1), 522, 2002.
Poon, P., and Wagner, C. Critical success factors revisited: success and failure cases of information
systems for senior executives Decision Support Systems 30(1), 393418, 2001.
Stiffler, M.A. Move from managing to driving performance. Performance Improvement, 45(9), 1720, 2006.
Watson, H.J. Three targets for data warehousing. Business Intelligence Journal, 11(4), 47, 2006.
Zeid, A. Your BI competency center: A blueprint for successful deployment. Business Intelligence Journal,
11(3), 1420, 2006.

9. State of Existing
Data Management
Infrastructure

Ariyachandra, T. and Watson, H.J. Which data warehouse architecture is most successful?
Business Intelligence Journal, 11(1), 46, 2006.
Barrett, D. and Barton, N. Best practices in building a data warehouse quickly. Business Intelligence
Journal, 11(4), 3744, 2006.
Biehl, M. Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 2007.
Eckerson, W. Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2006.
Hwang, M.I. and Xu, H. A survey of data warehousing success issues. Business Intelligence Journal,
10(4), 713, 2005.
MacDonald, M. Beat the odds. CMA Magazine, 72(5), 1618, 1998.
Politano, T. Master data management: A key enabler for CPM, February 18, 2007, http://www.tdwi.org/
info.aspx?id=33659.
Poon, P., and Wagner, C. Critical success factors revisited: success and failure cases of information
systems for senior executives Decision Support Systems 30(1), 393418, 2001.
Reich, B., and Benbasat, I. An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing the Success of
Customer-Oriented Strategic Systems Information Systems Research, 1(3), 2000.
Wixom, B. and Watson, H. An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing
Success MIS Quarterly, 25(1) 1741, 2001.

10. Evolutionary
Development
Methodology

Poon, P., and Wagner, C. Critical success factors revisited: success and failure cases of information
systems for senior executives Decision Support Systems 30(1), 393418, 2001.
Vessel, D. Bridging the IT and business needs gap. InfoWorld, 27(22), 2730, 2005.

Team Skills

Process Skills

Teams with both strong process skills and technical skills

are required for BPM project success. While most
organizations possess individuals with strong technical
experience and skills, they often lack individuals with
business-process analysis skills.

In order to understand and assess the key business processes within the organization and translate them into
meaningful metrics, a BPM project requires a team of
individuals skilled in business process analysis. These
individuals possess interpersonal and critical analysis

118

Ariyachandra and Frolick

skills required to interview various business areas and

then translate business activities into meaningful
metrics (Biehl, 2007) that accurately portray and predict
performance. They have skills in building strategy maps
and developing key performance indicators. While some
organizations create dedicated KPI teams composed of
business area experts to acquire the required process
skills, others assign business analysts who are familiar
with organizational business processes to this team
(Eckerson, 2006).

Technical Skills
In addition to a process skills team, the project requires a
team with sound technical skills that can translate the
metrics into a working application. The process skills
team works closely with the technical development team
to develop metric applications.
It is essential that these two teams work closely
together in developing a BPM solution. For instance,
strong partnership is necessary between process and
technical skills teams for data discovery and analysis. The
lack of close collaboration can lead to data discovery and
analysis taking up to 6080 percent of deployment time
(Gruman, 2004). It may also lead the technical development team to use existing metrics that may not
accurately reflect the predictive metrics needed for the
BPM solution.

User Support
BPM project success is also affected by the extent to
which users are involved in the development of a BPM
solution and engage in specific responsibilities and tasks
related to the BPM effort. User participation and support
ensures that user requirements are accurately captured
and communicated to the development team (Guimaraes,
Igbaria, & Lu,1992). It also enables users to be part of the
development process and gain a better understanding
and appreciation for the BPM solution. Consequently,
user support can lead to a solution that meets their
requirements which in turn leads to greater user satisfaction with the BPM solution (Biehl, 2007).

implementation depends on the interactions and

exchanges that bind IT with business goals. Thus, facilitation of effective communication between business and IT
influences BPM success.
Past empirical studies also suggest that greater communication leads to a convergence in understanding
between business and IT (Lind & Zmud, 1991). Effective
communication ensures that business and IT capabilities
are integrated effectively within the organization (Rockart,
Earl, &Ross, 1996). It also promotes greater alignment
between business and IT leading to a more effective
development and execution of organizational strategy
(Luftman, 2003a) through the BPM implementation.

Clear Link to Business Strategy

To be successful, a BPM initiative must have a clear link
to business strategy. The purpose of a BPM implementation is to effectively formulate, modify and execute strategy
in a continuous cycle (Frolick & Ariyachandra, 2006). Often,
organizations may implement metrics that are convenient or easily accessible. Such metrics may not be tied to
business strategy. An organization with such a BPM solution may not be monitoring its true performance, be
making effective decisions and actions, or be modifying
strategy to its best advantage. As a result, it is imperative
that the requirements and metrics that are translated to
the BPM solution have a direct strong link to business
strategy.
Shared domain knowledge between business and IT
executives can facilitate a strong link to business strategy.
The greater the level of shared domain knowledge, the
more likely that business and IT will develop a shared
understanding and vision. This in turn would lead to
improved linkages between business objectives and
system implementation (Reich & Benbasat, 2000).
Effective communication and clear link to business
strategy are two closely related critical factors that influence BPM success. Having a shared domain knowledge
between business and IT establishes a clear link to business strategy and promotes effective communication of
that strategy to the BPM initiative. Correspondingly,
effective communication between business and IT executives can lead to a shared understanding and a clear link
to business strategy (Reich & Benbasat, 2000).

Effective Communication
Facilitation of communication between business and IT
functions leads to a mutual understanding of the organizations strategic direction and goals. In so doing, IT is
better able to understand and gather business
requirements and metrics, which can then be captured
in a BPM solution. Successful application of IT to a BPM

State of Existing Data Management

Infrastructure
The nature of the existing data management infrastructure plays a crucial role in the successful deployment of a
BPM initiative. In many organizations, performance data
tends to exist in various user Excel spreadsheets (Gruman,

Critical Success Factors in Business Performance Management

2004). Typically, a BPM deployment builds on existing

data repositories, data integration efforts, and departmental systems such as ERP, CRM, and SCM. Consolidation of these dispersed silos of data is by far the most
difficult undertaking to deploying a successful BPM. To
deploy a BPM solution, organizations need an integrated
data repository or BI infrastructure that can be used as a
trusted, audited source of truth. When considering the
nature of the existing data management infrastructure,
the development team must assess the state of organizational data as well as the existing data management
technology.

119

iteratively in stages enables an organization to gain

quick wins and greater legitimacy for the overall BPM
project.
Awareness of each critical factor presented enables
the BPM development team to more readily face the
challenges and issues that arise during a BPM project.
While some of the factors are applicable to the development of any system implementation, certain factors are
more unique to BPM deployment as they also help ensure
strategic alignment between business and IT. In addition
to influencing BPM success, critical factors such as champion, management support, effective communication,
and clear link to business strategy also enables greater
strategic alignment.

Data
The nature and quality of data within source systems
affects data integration efforts necessary to build a BPM
solution. The greater the extent to which data definitions
and structures are standardized across organizational
data sources, the more likely an integrated data repository can be constructed to support a BPM solution
(Politano, 2007). This ensures the validity and legitimacy
of the BPM solution as the only information source for
performance management within the organization.

Technology
In addition to the nature of data within the source
systems, the compatibility of the BI infrastructure tool
set and BPM application technologies with existing tools
and server technologies also influence the BPM implementation. Greater compatibility with existing technologies and vendor tools enables greater integration of the
BPM solution to the existing data management architecture within the organization.

Evolutionary Development Methodology

The development methodology used for system implementation influences the effectiveness of a systems development effort (Wixom& Watson, 2001). An evolutionary
development methodology is widely acknowledged as a
key factor for system success (Houdeshel & Watson,
1987). According to industry experts, implementing a
BPM solution should involve the use of an evolutionary
development methodology in several stages. Typically,
most organizations start with financial performance
management, as most of the required financial data and
metrics are readily available (Gruman, 2004). Iteratively,
organizations may then move to operational performance data and other areas that are more easily quantifiable (Schiff, 2006). Implementing a BPM solution

Conclusion
Organizations have recognized the value of BPM to help
achieve strategic objectives. Currently, companies are
more conscientious of the importance of tracking how
well the organization is proceeding towards strategy
accomplishment. As a result, the importance and interest in BPM keeps expanding and growing in the industry
(Schiff, 2007).
BPM helps organizations achieve strategic objectives by
providing directions and motivation to all its members to
engage in tasks and activities that lead companies in the
right direction. The BPM infrastructure helps create metrics that accurately measure strategy execution and provides all stakeholders with the necessary knowledge and
information to succeed. To do so, BPM implementation
projects often take the form of enterprise wide implementation efforts that require support from all levels of the
organization as well as strong business and IT alignment.
Identifying the CSFs that influence BPM implementations helps an organization focus on the contextual variables that affect implementation success. Some of these
factors ensure BPM success by encouraging strong IT and
business alignment while others focus on effective IT
infrastructure development. By highlighting and paying
attention to these key factors during BPM deployment,
an organization can discover how these factors affect
BPM success. For example, the shortage of monetary
resources for the life of the project, a critical success
factor of BPM, will affect the successful BPM implementation. Similarly, the lack of a strong link to business strategy will hinder the creation of metrics that effectively
assess organizational action and performance leading to
strategy accomplishment. Using and paying attention to
critical success factors enables an organization to comprehend the reasons why a particular BPM effort may
fail. By observing CSFs, companies can effectively managed key contextual variables that influence the success
or failure of a BPM effort.

120

Ariyachandra and Frolick

Author Bios
Thilini Ariyachandra is an Assistant professor of MIS in the
Williams College of Business at Xavier University. Her
main research area is BI and data warehousing. She has
published in Decision Support Systems, Information Systems
Management, Business Intelligence Journal and the DM Review.
Mark N. Frolick is a Professor of MIS in the Williams College of Business at Xavier University and the holder of
the Western & Southern Chair in Management Information Systems. Dr. Frolick has authored over 100 articles. His research has appeared in such prestigious
journals as MIS Quarterly, Decision Sciences, Journal of Management Information Systems, Decision Support Systems, and
Information & Management.

References
Biehl, M. (2007). Success Factors for Implementing Global Information Systems. Communications of the ACM, 50(1).
Blansfield, D. (2006, August). A BI-BPM Blur? Business Performance
Management,, p. 2.
Clayton, J. Ask the Expert. Retrieved 4 May 2005 from
www.CIO.com.
Consultant news. (2007). AMR Research finds spending on Business Intelligence/Performance Management will reach $23.8B
in 2007. Retrieved March 28, 2007 fromwww.consultantnews.com/ article_display.aspx?p=adpandid=3588
Eckerson, W. (2006). Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring,
and managing your business. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Frolick, M., & Ariyachandra, T. R. (2006). Business performance
management: One truth. Information Systems Management, 23(1),
4148.
Griffin, J. (2004, January). Information Strategy: Overcoming
Political Challenges in Corporate Performance Management.
DM Review.
Gruman, G. CPM software: an elegant way to measure business
indicators: the right information, right now eschews assumptions, giving upper management new insight. Retrieved October 08, 2004 from www.infoworld.com

Guimaraes, T., Igbaria, M.,& Lu, M. (1992). The Determinants of

DSS Success:An Integrated Model. Decision Sciences, 23(2).
Hartlen, B. (2004, June). Playing Politics: Debunking the Myths
That Blosk a Successful BPM Implementation. Business
Performance Management.
Henderson, J. C., & Venkatraman, N. (1992). Strategic alignment:
A model for organizational transformation through information technology. In T. A. Kochan & M. Useem (Eds.) Transforming Organizations, Oxford and New York: Oxford University
Press.
Houdeshel, G., & Watson, H. (1987). The Management Information and Decision Support MIDS System at Lockheed-Georgia.
MIS Quarterly, 11(1), 2130.
Jensen, A., & Sage, A. (2000). A Systems Management
Approach for Improvement of Organizational Performance
Measurement Systems. Information Knowledge Systems
Management, 2(1).
Lind, M. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1991). The Influence of a Convergence in Understanding Between Technology Providers and
Users on Technology Innovativeness. Organization Science, 2(2)
195217.
Luftman, J. (2003a). Competing in the Information Age. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Luftman, J. (2003b) Assessing IT/Business Alignment. Information Strategy. The Executives Journal, 20:1.
Miranda, S. (2004, Mar./April). Beyond BI: Benefiting from
Corporate Performance Management Solutions. Financial
Executive, 20:2, 5861.
Politano, T. Master data management: A key enabler for CPM.
Retrieved February 18, 2007 from www.tdwi.org/
info.aspx?id=33659
Reich, B., & Benbasat, I. (2000). Factors that influence the social
dimension of alignment between business and information
technology objectives. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 81114.
Rockart, J., Earl, M., & Ross, J. (1996). Eight Imperatives for the
New IT Organization. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 4355.
Schiff, C. 2007 BPM Pulse Survey Results, Part 1: The Impact of
Operational Analytics. Retrieved February 21, 2007 from
www.b-eye-network.com
Whiting, R. (2006, Nov. 6). BPM Smartens Up. Information Week.
Wixom, B., & Watson, H. (2001). An Empirical Investigation of
the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing Success. MIS Quarterly,
25(1) 1741.