BazEkon - The Main Library of the Cracow University of Economics

BazEkon home page

Main menu

Author
Potoczek Natalia R. (Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland)
Title
The Use of Process Benchmarking in the Water Industry to Introduce Changes in the digitization of the Company's Value Chain
Source
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2021, vol. 17, nr 4, s. 51-89, rys., bibliogr. s. 77-88
Issue title
Entrepreneurship and Innovation in the Age of Digital Transformation
Keyword
Łańcuch wartości, Benchmarking, Przemysł 4.0, Technologie cyfrowe
Value chain, Benchmarking, Industry 4.0, Digital technologies
Note
JEL Classification: L32, L95, O33
streszcz., summ.
Abstract
CEL: Przegląd literatury oraz licznych źródeł internetowych, w szczególności platform informacyjnych międzynarodowych organizacji wspierających działalność sektora wodnego, miał na celu weryfikację doświadczeń badawczych w zakresie dojrzałości cyfrowej przedsiębiorstw, identyfikację podejść badawczych stosowanych w benchmarkingu wodociągów, oraz określenie poziomu zainteresowania analizą łańcucha wartości branży wodociągowej. Stwierdzono, że brak jest metodyki benchmarkingu, która umożliwiłaby obserwację zmian zachodzących w procesach biznesowych przedsiębiorstw wodociągowych pod wpływem technologii cyfrowych. Dlatego w niniejszym artykule przedstawiono ramy do benchmarkingu cyfryzacji procesów biznesowych. W artykule przedstawiono również przesłanki do benchmarkingu cyfryzacji procesów wchodzących w skład łańcucha wartości przedsiębiorstwa wodociągowego oraz korzyści płynące z włączenia technologii cyfrowych wspierających procesy z perspektywy ekonomicznej, społecznej i środowiskowej. Jednym z kluczowych etapów tworzenia koncepcji badań benchmarkingowych jest stworzenie macierzy zmiennych odnoszących się do celów realizowanych przez przedsiębiorstwa wodociągowe. METODYKA: Proponowana koncepcja benchmarkingu cyfryzacji procesów biznesowych wchodzących w skład łańcucha wartości przedsiębiorstwa wodociągowego została przygotowana w oparciu o studia literaturowe oraz analizę wybranych platform internetowych międzynarodowych organizacji działających na rzecz sektora wodnego. WYNIKI: Analiza dekompozycji łańcucha wartości przedsiębiorstwa, kryteriów i poziomów oceny dojrzałości procesowej oraz najnowszych technologii cyfrowych pozwoliła na przygotowanie dwóch scenariuszy etapów benchmarkingu procesów oraz wykorzystanie technologii cyfrowych w zależności od poziomu dojrzałości procesowej oraz doświadczeń benchmarkingowych. IMPLIKACJE DLA TEORII I PRAKTYKI: Zaproponowany model jest wysoce koncepcyjny i wymaga walidacji w badaniach pilotażowych w celu weryfikacji poziomów dekompozycji łańcucha wartości, wyboru kluczowych technologii cyfrowych do badań oraz określenia skali dojrzałości cyfrowej dla każdej z uwzględnionych w badaniu technologii. Organizacje prowadzące badania benchmarkingowe mogą poszerzać zakres swoich badań i dostarczać przedsiębiorstwom wodociągowym informacje o najnowszych technologiach cyfrowych wspierających procesy biznesowe. ORYGINALNOŚĆ I WARTOŚĆ: Wykorzystanie taksonomii łańcucha wartości do oceny wsparcia procesów biznesowych przez technologie cyfrowe jest oryginalnym podejściem. Umożliwia zdobycie wiedzy o znaczeniu technologii cyfrowych we wszystkich procesach realizowanych w przedsiębiorstwie. (abstrakt oryginalny)

PURPOSE: The review of the literature and numerous online sources, in particular the information platforms of international organizations supporting the activities of the water sector, was aimed at verifying research experiences in the field of digital maturity of enterprises, identifying research approaches used in benchmarking water utilities, and determining the level of interest in the analysis of the water supply industry value chain. It was found that there is no benchmarking methodology that would enable the observation of changes in the business processes of water supply companies under the influence of digital technologies. Therefore, this article presents a framework for benchmarking the digitization of business processes. The article also presents the premises for benchmarking the digitization of processes included in the value chain of a water supply company and the benefits of including digital technologies supporting processes from an economic, social, and environmental perspective. One of the key stages of creating the concept of benchmarking research is creating a matrix of variables relating to the objectives pursued by water supply companies. METHODOLOGY: The proposed concept of benchmarking the digitization of business processes included in the value chain of a water utility company was prepared based on literature studies and analysis of selected internet platforms of international organizations operating in the water sector. FINDINGS: The analysis of the decomposition of the enterprise value chain, the criteria, and levels of process maturity assessment, and the latest digital technologies made it possible to prepare two scenarios of the benchmarking stages of processes and use digital technologies depending on the level of process maturity and benchmarking experience. IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE: The proposed model is highly conceptual and requires validation in pilot studies to verify the levels of decomposition of the value chain, to select key digital technologies for research and to determine the scale of digital maturity for each of the technologies included in the study. Organizations conducting benchmarking research can broaden the scope of their research and provide water utilities with information on the latest digital technologies supporting business processes. ORIGINALITY AND VALUE: Using value chain taxonomy to assess the support of business processes by digital technologies is an original approach. It enables the acquisition of knowledge about the importance of digital technologies in all processes carried out in the enterprise. (original abstract)
Full text
Show
Bibliography
Show
  1. Ahmed, P., & Rafiq, M. (1998). Integrated benchmarking: A holistic examination of select techniques for benchmarking analysis. Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, 5 (3), 225-242. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635779810234802
  2. Ahmed, T., Fung, A. S., & Kumar, R. (2020). Energy benchmarking and ventilation related energy saving potentials for SMEs in Greater Toronto Area. Journal of Cleaner Production, 246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118961
  3. Al Khamisi, Y. N., Khan, M. K., & Munive- Hernandez, J. E. (2019). Knowledge-based lean six sigma system for enhancing quality management performance in healthcare environment. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(1), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-06-2017-0066
  4. Al Nuseirat, A. A., El Kahlout, Z. M., Abbas, A., Adebanjo, D., Punnakitikashem, P., & Mann, R. (2019). An analysis of a structured benchmarking project: The case of Dubai Electricity and Water Authority's benchmarking project. Benchmarking, 26(5), 1431-1450. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2018-0032
  5. Alcácer, V., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2019). Scanning the Industry 4.0: A literature review on technologies for manufacturing systems. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 22(3), 899-919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2019.01.006
  6. Aldrich, H. E. (1999). Organizations Evolving. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
  7. Al-Hashimi, A. M., & Jabbar, A. A.-H. (2019). Role of integrating ABC and VCA through the use of supply chain management in improving potable water tariff in Iraq. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(1), 546-561.
  8. Allan, F. (1993). Benchmarking-Practical aspects for information professionals. Special Libraries, 84(3), 123-130.
  9. Allard, A. (1967). Evolution and Human Behavior. New York: Natural History Press.
  10. Anand, G., & Kodali, R. (2008). Benchmarking the benchmarking models. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 15 (3), 257-291. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770810876593
  11. Baldwin, R., & Venables, A. J. (2015). Trade policy and industrialization when backward and forward linkages matter. Research in Economics, 69(2), 123-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rie.2015.02.008
  12. Beath, A., & Flynn, C. (2020). Benchmarking the performance of private equity portfolios of the World's largest institutional investors: A view from CEM benchmarking. Journal of Index Investing, 30(1), 67-87. https://doi.org/10.3905/joi.2020.1.155
  13. Berg, S. (2010). Water Utility Benchmarking: Measurement, Methodologies and Performance Incentives. London: IWA Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.iwapublishing.com/ books/9781843392729/water- utility-benchmarking
  14. Berg, S. (2013). Advances in benchmarking to improve water utility operations: A review of six IWA books. Water Policy, 15(2), 325-333. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2012.089
  15. Berg, S., & Marques, R. (2011). Quantitative studies of water and sanitation utilities: A benchmarking literature survey. Water Policy, 13(5), 591-606. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2011.041
  16. Berg, S. V., & Phillips, M. A. (2017). Data availability as a key tool for regulating government-owned water utilities. Utilities Policy, 49, 30-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2017.06.012
  17. Bickauske, D., Simanaviciene, Z., Jakubavicius, A., Vilys, M., & Mykhalchyshyna, L. (2020). Analysis and perspectives of the level of enterprises digitalization (Lithuanian manufacturing sector case). Independent Journal of Management & Production, 11(9), 2291-2307. https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v11i9.1404
  18. Blanchard, C., Comm, C. L., & Mathaisel, D. F. X. (2008). Adding value to service providers: Benchmarking Wal-Mart. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 15(2), 166-177. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770810864875
  19. Brazinskas, S., Pipiriene, V., & Khayrzoda, S. (2021). Digital platforms: Drivers for competence and competitiveness growth. International Journal of Learning and Change, 13(4-5), 490-509. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLC.2021.116695
  20. Broberg, P., Umans, T., Skog, P., & Theodorsson, E. (2018). Auditors' professional and organizational identities and commercialization in audit firms. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(2), 374-399. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2014-1607
  21. Bustinza, O. F., Bigdeli, A. Z., Baines, T., & Elliot, C. (2015). Servitization and competitive advantage: The importance of organizational structure and value chain position. Research-Technology Management, 58(5), 53-60. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5805354
  22. Cabrera, E. Jr., Dane, P., Haskins, S., & Theuretzbacher-Fritz, H. (2010). Benchmarking Water Services: Guiding Water Utilities to Excellence. London: IWA Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.iwapublishing.com/books/9781843391982/benchmarking -water-services
  23. Camp, R. C. (1989). Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to superior performance. Quality Progress, 22(4), 62-69.
  24. Campbell, D. (1969). Variation and selective retention in socio-cultural evolution. General Systems, 14, 69-85.
  25. Castka, P., & Balzarova, M. A. (2018). An exploration of interventions in ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certification context - A multiple case study approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1642-1652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.096
  26. Cetrulo, T. B., Marques, R. C., & Malheiros, T. F. (2019). An analytical review of the efficiency of water and sanitation utilities in developing countries. Water Research, 161, 372-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.05.044
  27. Chofreh, A. G., Goni, F. A., Zeinalnezhad, M., Navidar, S., Shayestehzadeh, H., & Klemes, J. J. (2019). Value chain mapping of the water and sewage treatment to contribute to sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management, 239, 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.023
  28. Choi, S. C., Suh, E. S., & Park, C. J. (2020). Value chain and stakeholder-driven product platform design. Systems Engineering, 23(3), 312-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21527
  29. Christiansson, M.-T., & Rentzhog, O. (2020). Lessons from the "BPO journey" in a public housing company: Toward a strategy for BPO. Business Process Management Journal, 26(2), 373-404. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-04-2017-0091
  30. Daniels, S. (1996). Benchmarking. Work Study, 45(3), 18-20.
  31. Daraio, C., Kerstens, K., Nepomuceno, T., & Sickles, R. C. (2020). Empirical surveys of frontier applications: A meta-review. International Transactions in Operational Research, 27(2), 709-738. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12649
  32. De Toni, A., & Meneghetti, A. (2000). Production planning process for a network of firms in the textile- apparel industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 65(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(99)00087-0
  33. Delpachitra, S., & Beal, D. (2002). Process benchmarking: An application to lending products. Benchmarking, 9(4), 409-420. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770210442725
  34. Ebner, K., Mueller, B., & Ahlemann, F. (2019). Understanding the success of strategic IT benchmarking-Exploring the role of the individual level. Information and Management, 56(5), 640-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.10.005
  35. Ebner, K., Urbach, N., & Mueller, B. (2016). Exploring the path to success: A review of the strategic IT benchmarking literature. Information and Management, 53(4), 447-466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.11.001
  36. Evans, M. T. P., Tisak, D. J., & Williamson, D. F. (2012). Twenty-first century benchmarking: Searching for the next generation. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 19(6), 760-780. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635771211284314
  37. Fernandez, P., Mccarthy, I. P., & Rakotobe- Joel, T. (2001). An evolutionary approach to benchmarking. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 8(4), 281-305. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770110403783
  38. Ferreira, D. C., & Marques, R. C. (2021). Public-private partnerships in health care services: Do they outperform public hospitals regarding quality and access? Evidence from Portugal. Socio- Economic Planning Sciences, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100798
  39. Fisher, D. M. (2004). The business process maturity model. A practical approach for identifying opportunities for optimization. BPTrend. Retrieved 2 May, 2021, from https://www.bptrends.com/bpt/wp-content/publicationfiles/10-04%20ART%20BP%20Maturity %20Model%20-%20Fisher.pdf
  40. Fonseca, L. M. (2018). Industry 4.0 and the digital society: Concepts, dimensions and envisioned benefits. Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, 12(1), 386-397. https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2018- 0034
  41. Francisco, A., Mohammadi, N., & Taylor, J. E. (2020). Smart city digital twin- enabled energy management: Toward real-time urban building energy benchmarking. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(2). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943- 5479.0000741
  42. Garzoni, A., De Turi, I., Secundo, G., & Del Vecchio, P. (2020). Fostering digital transformation of SMEs: A four levels approach. Management Decision, 58(8), 1543- 1562. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2019-0939
  43. Gill, M., & Van Boskirk, S. (2016). The Digital Maturity Model 4.0. Benchmarks: Digital Business Transformation Playbook. Forrester Research, Inc. Retrieved 5 May, 2021, from https://forrester.nitro- digital.com/pdf/Forrester-s%20Digital%20Maturity%20Model%204.0.pdf
  44. Glavan, L. M. (2020). An investigation of business process maturity: Report on Croatian companies. Business Systems Research, 11(2), 159-165. https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2020-0022
  45. Gleeson, T., Wada, Y., Bierkens, M. F. P., & Van Beek, L. P. H. (2012). Water balance of global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint. Nature, 488(7410), 197-200. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11295
  46. Goni, F. A., Gholamzadeh Chofreh, A., Estaki Orakani, Z., Klemes, J. J., Davoudi, M., & Mardani, A. (2021). Sustainable business model: A review and framework development. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 23(3), 889-897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01886-z
  47. Graetz, G., & Michaels, G. (2018). Robots at work. Review of Economics and Statistics, 100(5), 753-768. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00754
  48. Gurbaxani, V., & Dunkle, D. (2019). Gearing up for successful digital transformation. MIS Quarterly Executive, 18(3), 209-220. https://doi.org/10.17705/2msqe.00017
  49. Haefner, B., Kraemer, A., Stauss, T., & Lanza, G. (2014). Quality value stream mapping. Procedia CIRP, 17, 254-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.01.093
  50. Hammer, M. (2007). The process audit. Harvard Business Review. April, 111-123. Retrieved 15 November, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2007/04/the-process-audit
  51. Harmon, P. (2009). Process maturity models. BPTrends, 2(5). Retrieved 5 May, 2021 from https://www.bptrends.com/bpt/wp- content/publicationfiles/spotlight_051909.pdf
  52. Harmon, P. (2019). Business process change: A business process management guide for managers and process professionals. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-02868-9
  53. Härting, R.-C., Reichstein, C., & Sochacki, R. (2019). Potential benefits of digital business models and its processes in the financial and insurance industry. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, 143, 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8303-8_18
  54. Hoekstra, A. Y., Chapagain, A. K., & van Oel, P. R. (2019). Progress in water footprint assessment: Towards collective action in water governance. Water (Switzerland), 11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/w11051070
  55. Hurmelinna, P., Peltola, S., Tuimala, J., & Virolainen, V.-M. (2002). Attaining world-class R&D by benchmarking buyer-supplier relationships. International Journal of Production Economics, 80(1), 39-47. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(02)00241-4
  56. Keller, T., Bayer, C., Bausch, P., & Metternich, J. (2019). Benefit evaluation of digital assistance systems for assembly workstations. Procedia CIRP 81, 441-446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.076
  57. Khosravi, A. (2016). Business process rearrangement and renaming: A new approach to process orientation and improvement. Business Process Management Journal, 22(1), 116-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-02-2015 -0012
  58. Kulikowski, K. (2021). Cognitive biases policy (CBP) in performance improvements - the example of benchmarking. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2020-0060
  59. Kyrö, P. (2003). Revising the concept and forms of benchmarking. Benchmarking, 10(3), 210-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770310477753
  60. Liboni, L. B., Liboni, L. H. B., & Cezarino, L. O. (2018). Electric utility 4.0: Trends and challenges towards process safety and environmental protection. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 117, 593-605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.05.027
  61. Lichtblau, K., Stich, V., Bertenrath, R., Blum, M., Bleider, M., Millack, A., Schmitt, K., Schmitz, E., & Schröter, M. (2015). Industry 4.0 Readiness. The IMPULS Foundation of the German Engineering Federation (VDMA). Retrieved 25 February, 2021, from http://industrie40.vdma.org/documents/4214230/5356229/Industrie%204.0%20Readiness%20Study %20English.pdf/f6de92c1-74ed-4790-b6a4-74b30b1e83f0
  62. Lokuge, S., Sedera, D., Grover, V., & Dongming, X. (2019). Organizational readiness for digital innovation: Development and empirical calibration of a construct. Information and Management, 56(3), 445-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.09.001
  63. Looy, A. V. (2020). Capabilities for managing business processes: A measurement instrument. Business Process Management Journal, 26(1), 287-311. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2018-0157
  64. Lopes, A. L. M., De Barros Mesquita, R., Lambertucci, M., & Lara, J. E. (2020). The evolution of the benchmarking methodology data envelopment analysis-DEA in the cost regulation of the Brazilian electric power transmission sector: A critical look at the renewal of concessions. Gestao e Producao, 27 (1). https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X3940-20
  65. Luo, M., Fan, H. Q., & Liu, G. (2020). Measuring regional differences of construction productive efficiency in China: A distance friction minimization approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(4), 952-974. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2019-0195
  66. Maciel, A. F., & Wallendorf, M. (2017). Taste engineering: An extended consumer model of cultural competence constitution. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 726-746. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw054
  67. Magdaleno, A. M., Cappelli, C., Baião, F. A., Santoro, F. M., & Araujo, R. (2008). Towards collaboration maturity in business processes: An exploratory study in oil production processes. Information Systems Management, 25(4), 302-318. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530802384159
  68. Malik, R., Mann, R., & Knapman, R. (2021). Rapid benchmarking: The case of a multinational dairy company. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 28(3), 1031-1058. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-03-2020-0099
  69. Marti, J. M. V. (2000). ICBS Intellectual Capital Benchmarking Systems. International Journal of Technology Management, 20(5-8), 799-818. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2000.002890
  70. Maull, R. S., Tranfield, D. R., & Maull, W. (2003). Factors characterizing the maturity of BPR programmes. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 23(5-6), 596- 624. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310476645
  71. McCormack, D. K. (2007). Business Process Maturity: Theory and Application. Charleston: BookSurge.
  72. McCormack, K., Willems, J., van den Bergh, J., Deschoolmeester, D., Willaert, P., Štemberger, M. I., Škrinjar, R., Trkman, P., Ladeira, M. B., de Oliveira, M. P. V., Vuksic, V. B., & Vlahovic, N. (2009). A global investigation of key turning points in business process maturity. Business Process Management Journal, 15(5), 792-815. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150910987946
  73. Meybodi, M. Z. (2009). Benchmarking performance measures in traditional and just-in-time companies. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 16(1), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770910936531
  74. Meybodi, M. Z. (2015). Consistency of strategic and tactical benchmarking performance measures: A perspective on managerial positions and organizational size. Benchmarking, 22(6), 1019-1032. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2013- 0074
  75. Minelli, A. (2021). Performance Benchmarking in the Water Utilities Sector. Melbourne: KPI Institute. Retrieved 2 February, 2021, from https://www.performancemagazine.org/benchmarking-water-utilities-sector/
  76. Miri-Lavassani, K., & Movahedi, B. (2018). Achieving higher supply chain performance via business process orientation. Business Process Management Journal, 24(3), 671-694. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-07-2016-0140
  77. Mooney, C. L. (2014). Five reasons corporate responsibility professionals need a value chain map. GreenBiz. Retrieved 5 February, 2021, from https://greenbiz.com/blog/2014/01/09/5-reasons-cr-professionals -needvalue-chain- map
  78. Morse, L., Trompet, M., Barron, A., Anderson, R., & Graham, D. J. (2020). A  benchmarking framework for understanding bus performance in the US. Benchmarking, 27(4), 1533-1550. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2019-0367
  79. Movahedi, B., Miri-Lavassani, K., & Kumar, U. (2016). Operational excellence through business process orientation: An intra- and inter-organizational analysis. TQM Journal, 28(3), 467-495. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-12-2013-0147
  80. Mugisha, S. (2011). Utility benchmarking and regulation in developing countries: Practical application of performance monitoring and incentives. London: IWA Publishing.
  81. Mugisha, S., & Berg, S. V. (2008). State-owned enterprises: NWSC's turnaround in Uganda. African Development Review, 20(2), 305-334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8268.2008.00188.x
  82. Muntean, M. (2018). Business intelligence issues for sustainability projects. Sustainability, 10(2), 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020335
  83. Nagy, J., Oláh, J., Erdei, E., Máté, D., & Popp, J. (2018). The role and impact of industry 4.0 and the internet of things on the business strategy of the value chain-the case of hungary. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103491
  84. Novak, R., & Janeš, A. (2019). Business process orientation in the Slovenian power supply. Business Process Management Journal, 25(4), 780-798. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-05-2017-0130
  85. Ockwell, D., Atela, J., Mbeva, K., Chengo, V., Byrne, R., Durrant, R., Kasprowicz, V., & Ely, A. (2019). Can pay-as-you-go, digitally enabled business models support sustainability transformations in developing countries? Outstanding questions and a theoretical basis for future research. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10022105
  86. Pace, L. A., & Kelly, E. P. (1998). TQM at Xerox: Lessons worth duplicating. International Journal of Technology Management, 16(4-6), 326-335. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.1998.002678
  87. Pagani, M., & Pardo, C. (2017). The impact of digital technology on relationships in a business network. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009
  88. Partovi, F. Y., & Hopton, W. E. (1994). Analytic hierarchy process as applied to two types of inventory problems. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 35(1), 13-19.
  89. Peruzzini, M., Grandi, F., & Pellicciari, M. (2017). Benchmarking of tools for User eXperience analysis in Industry 4.0. Procedia Manufacturing, 27th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, Faim2017, 11, pp. 806-813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.182
  90. Ponomarenko, V. (2019). The applicability of process-orientation to software development projects: The applicability of process- orientation to software development projects. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 10(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJITPM.2019040101
  91. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. London: Collier Macmillan.
  92. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.
  93. Potoczek, N. (2017). The role of human resource management in achieving process maturity by organizations. In Z. Ndaba & T. Mokoteli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance (pp. 371-379). Johannesburg, South Africa: University of Witwatersrand, Wits Business School. Retrieved from https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/f4fd8e94-8c50-4178-b53a-557eb1014f4f- 06c58406/relevance/1
  94. Röglinger, M., Pöppelbuß, J., & Becker, J. (2012). Maturity models in business process management. Business Process Management Journal, 18(2), 328-346. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637151211225225
  95. Rohloff, M. (2009). Case study and maturity model for business process management implementation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 5701 LNCS, 128-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03848- 8_10
  96. Rosemann, M., & Bruin, T. (2005). Towards a Business Process Management Maturity Model. ECIS 2005 Proceedings. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2005/37
  97. Rosemann, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2015). The six core elements of business process management. In Handbook on Business Process Management 1 (pp. 105-122). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45100- 3
  98. Rothberg, H. N., & Erickson, G. S. (2017). Big data systems: Knowledge transfer or intelligence insights? Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(1), 92-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2015-0300
  99. Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (2012). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  100. Saguin, K. (2018). Mapping access to urban value chains of aquaculture in Laguna Lake, Philippines. Aquaculture, 493, 424-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.01.030
  101. Salim, Z., Pranata, N., & Sabilla, K. (2020). Benchmarking Singapore and Hong Kong to develop Indonesia's trade facilitation. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 26(1-2), 119-147. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2020.109829
  102. Schumacher, A., Erol, S., & Sihn, W. (2016). A  maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. In A. Nassehi & S. Newman (Eds.), Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual Production (Vol. 52, pp. 161-166). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.07.040
  103. Shafagatova, A., & Van Looy, A. (2021). A conceptual framework for process-oriented employee appraisals and rewards. Knowledge and Process Management, 28(1), 90-104. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1644
  104. Shetty, Y. (1993). Aiming high-Competitive benchmarking for superior performance. Long Range Planning, 26(1), 39-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024 -6301(93)90231-4
  105. Sommarberg, M., & Makinen, S. J. (2019). A method for anticipating the disruptive nature of digitalization in the machine-building industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 808-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.044
  106. Telnov, Y. F., Kazakov, V. A., & Trembach, V. M. (2020). Developing a knowledge-based system for the design of innovative product creation processes for network enterprises. Biznes Informatika-Business Informatics, 14 (3), 35-53. https://doi.org/10.17323/2587-814X.2020.3.35.53
  107. Tonelli, F., Demartini, M., Loleo, A., & Testa, C. (2016). A novel methodology for manufacturing firms value modeling and mapping to improve operational performance in the Industry 4.0 Era. Procedia CIRP, 57, 122-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.022
  108. Trabucchi, D., Buganza, T., Dell'Era, C., & Pellizzoni, E. (2018). Exploring the inbound and outbound strategies enabled by user generated big data: Evidence from leading smartphone applications. Creativity and Innovation Management, 27(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12241
  109. Trento, C. R., Stüker, T., Pereira, G. M., Borchardt, M., & Viegas, C. V. (2016). Strategic benchmarking of service pricing based on the value added. Benchmarking, 23(4), 754-767. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2013-0073
  110. Tsironis, L. K., & Matthopoulos, P. P. (2015). Towards the identification of important strategic priorities of the supply chain network: An empirical investigation. Business Process Management Journal, 21(6), 1279-1298. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-12-2014-0120
  111. Valdez- De-Leon, O. (2019). How to develop a digital ecosystem: A practical framework. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9(8), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1260
  112. van Assen, M. (2018). Process orientation and the impact on operational performance and customer-focused performance. Business Process Management Journal, 24(2), 446-458. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2016-0217
  113. Vasanth Kumar, D., Madhan Mohan, G., & Mohanasundaram, K. M. (2020). Lean supply chain management in garment industry using value stream mapping. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 37(1), 133- 143. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2020.109440
  114. Villamayor-Tomas, S., Grundmann, P., Epstein, G., Evans, T., & Kimmich, C. (2015). The water-energy-food security nexus through the lenses of the value chain and the institutional analysis and development frameworks. Water Alternatives, 8(1), 735-755.
  115. Walker, R. (1992). Rank Xerox-Management revolution. Long Range Planning, 25(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(92)90305-l
  116. Walther, G., & Spengler, T. (2004). Empirical analysis of collaboration potential of SMEs in product recovery networks in Germany. Progress in Industrial Ecology, 1(4), 363-384. https://doi.org/10.1504/PIE.2004.005853
  117. Watson, G. H. (1993a). Strategic Benchmarking. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
  118. Watson, G. H. (1993b). The benchmarking workbook-Adapting best practices for performance improvement. Training & Development, 47(5), 103- 103.
  119. Weber, C., Curtis, B., & Gardiner, T. (2008). Business Process Maturity Model 1.0. Object Management Group. Retrieved from https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMM/1.0/PDF
  120. Welchman, L. (2015). Managing Chaos: Digital Governance by Design. New York: Rosenfeld Media.
  121. White, D. J., Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Sun, L., & Meng, B. (2018). The water- energy-food nexus in East Asia: A tele-connected value chain analysis using inter-regional input-output analysis. Applied Energy, 210, 550-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.05.159
  122. Willaert, P., Van Den Bergh, J., Willems, J., & Deschoolmeester, D. (2007). The process-oriented organization: A holistic view developing a framework for business process orientation maturity. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 4714 LNCS, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75183- 0_1
  123. Williams, S., Pickard, C., Glass, K., & Glass, A. (2020). Benchmarking water retail cost efficiency in England and Wales. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 431-467. https://doi.org/10.1080/13571516.2020.1790979
  124. Wudhikarn, R., Chakpitak, N., & Neubert, G. (2020). Improving the strategic benchmarking of intellectual capital management in logistics service providers. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(23), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310174
  125. Zagkas, V. K., & Lyridis, D. V. (2011). A framework for modelling and benchmarking maritime clusters: An application to the maritime cluster of Piraeus. In X. J. Yang, J. M. W. Low & L. C. Tang (Eds.), Advances in maritime logistics and supply chain systems (pp. 131-156). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814329866_0006
  126. Zairi, M., & Whymark, J. (2000). The transfer of best practices: How to build a culture of benchmarking and continuous learning - part 2. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 7(2), 146-167. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770010326212
  127. Zhang, F. (2020). EMNC technological knowledge flow patterns: An overview of the US patents granted. Multinational Business Review, 28 (1), 129-155. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-03-2019-0021
  128. Internet sources
  129. Industry 4.0: Building the digital enterprise (2016). PwC. Retrieved 2 February, 2021, from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/industries-4.0/landing-page/industry-4.0-building- your-digital-enterprise-april-2016.pdf
  130. Performance Benchmarking in the Water Utilities Sector. The KPI Institute. Retrieved 15 May, 2021, from https://www.performancemagazine.org/benchmarking-water-utilities-sector/
  131. Polish Waterworks Chamber of Commerce (Izba Gospodarcza Wodociągi Polskie - IGWP). Retrieved 25 May, 2021, from https://www.igwp.org.pl/index.php/nasza-aktywnosc/benchmarking
  132. Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (2017). WHO-UNICEF JMP. Retrieved 5 February, 2021, from https://data.unicef.org/resources/progress-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene- 2017-update-sdg-baselines/
  133. Strategic Plan IWA 2019-2024, Retrieved 12 December, 2020, from https://iwa-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/IWA_Strategic-Plan-2019- 2024.pdf
  134. Supporting Countries in Unprecedented Times. The World Bank Annual Report 2020. Retrieved 5 August, 2021, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/annual-report#anchor- annual
  135. Sustainable Development Goals (2015). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Retrieves 2 May, 2021, from https://sdgs.un.org/goals
  136. The Connected Enterprise Maturity Model (2016). Rockwell Automation Inc. Retrieved 25 February, 2021, from https://literature.rockwellautomation.com/idc/groups/literature/documents/wp/cie- wp002_-en-p.pdf
  137. The European Federation of National Associations of Water Services (EurEau). Retrieved 25 May, 2021, from https://www.eureau.org/
  138. The International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation utilities (IBNET). Retrieved 5 February, 2021, from https://www.ib-net.org/
  139. Transformation through innovation, ecosystems and sustained outcomes (2021). PwC. Retrieved 7 June, 2021, from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/analyst-citations/2021/transformation-through- innovation.html
  140. UN World Water Development Report, Wastewater: The Untapped Resource. (2017). UNESCO. Retrieved 5 May, 2021, from https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/2017-un-world-water-development-report- wastewater-untapped-resource
  141. US EPA Environmental Protection Agency. Redrived 25 May, 2021, from https://www.epa.gov/environmental-topics/water-topics
Cited by
Show
ISSN
2299-7075
Language
eng
URI / DOI
https://doi.org/10.7341/20211743
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu