Strategic convergence of Business Process Management and digital information technologies: action research of implementing BPM in a Brazilian public universityAbstract
Abstract Digital Transformation has increasingly reshaped public organizations, requiring higher levels of efficiency, transparency, and service quality. Although Business Process Management (BPM) is widely adopted as a managerial approach, empirical evidence on how BPM can strategically converge with Digital Information and Communication Technologies (DICT) in public universities remains limited. This study addresses this gap by analyzing how the integration of BPM and digital certification can improve administrative processes in a Brazilian public university. An action research methodology was employed, structured in sequential phases that included the institutionalization of a BPM program, training of process architects, process mapping and modeling using BPMN, prioritization of critical processes through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and redesign and simulation of the selected process using the Bizagi Modeler. The results show that integrating BPM with digital certification enabled a significant redesign of the diploma issuing and registration process, reducing non-value-adding activities, increasing transparency, and shortening lead times. Beyond operational improvements, the study highlights top management support, structured communication, and organizational learning as critical success factors for sustaining BPM initiatives in public-sector digital transformation. The study offers empirical evidence and a replicable methodological pathway for aligning BPM with digital technologies in public organizations and suggests avenues for future research on the integration of BPM with emerging digital technologies in public sector digital transformation.
Keywords:
Business process management; Digital transformation; Digital information and communication technologies; Digital certification; Analytic hierarchy process
Resumo
Resumo A Transformação Digital tem remodelado de forma crescente as organizações públicas, exigindo níveis mais elevados de eficiência, transparência e qualidade na prestação de serviços. Embora a Gestão de Processos de Negócio (BPM) seja amplamente adotada como abordagem gerencial, ainda são limitadas as evidências empíricas sobre como o BPM pode convergir estrategicamente com as Tecnologias Digitais de Informação e Comunicação (TDIC) em universidades públicas. Este estudo aborda essa lacuna ao analisar como a integração entre BPM e certificação digital pode contribuir para a melhoria de processos administrativos em uma universidade pública brasileira. Adotou-se a metodologia de pesquisa-ação, estruturada em etapas sequenciais que incluíram a institucionalização de um programa de BPM, a capacitação de arquitetos de processos, o mapeamento e a modelagem de processos por meio da notação BPMN, a priorização de processos críticos utilizando o método Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) e o redesenho e a simulação do processo selecionado com o uso da ferramenta Bizagi Modeler. Os resultados indicam que a integração entre BPM e certificação digital possibilitou o redesenho do processo de emissão e registro de diplomas, com redução de atividades que não agregam valor, aumento da transparência e diminuição do tempo de processamento. Além dos ganhos operacionais, o estudo destaca o apoio da alta gestão, a comunicação estruturada e o aprendizado organizacional como fatores críticos de sucesso para a sustentação de iniciativas de BPM em ambientes de Transformação Digital no setor público. O estudo oferece evidências empíricas e um percurso metodológico replicável para o alinhamento da BPM com tecnologias digitais em organizações públicas.
Palavras-chave:
Gestão de processos de negócio; Transformação digital; Tecnologias digitais de informação e comunicação; Certificação digital; Analytic hierarchy process
1 Introduction
Public organizations are increasingly pressured to improve efficiency, transparency, and service quality while operating under strict legal, budgetary, and institutional constraints. In this context, Digital Transformation has emerged as a central strategy to redesign public services and administrative processes, particularly through the adoption of DICT. Initiatives associated with Industry 4.0, Services 4.0, e-Government, and Universities 4.0 exemplify this movement, emphasizing automation, interoperability, and data-driven decision-making as key enablers of organizational change (Denner et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2018; Fischer et al., 2020; Favoretto et al., 2019).
Among the managerial approaches capable of supporting such transformations, BPM has been widely recognized as a discipline that integrates organizational strategy, operational processes, and performance management through a process-oriented perspective (Smith & Fingar, 2007; ABPMP, 2020). BPM provides methods and techniques to analyze, model, implement, and continuously improve business processes, fostering coordination among organizational actors and contributing to value creation for stakeholders, including citizens in the public sector (Van der Aalst et al., 2003; Delgado et al., 2022).
From a supply chain perspective, demand management emerges as a critical process for aligning market needs with operational capabilities, reducing uncertainty, and improving service levels, inventory management, and asset utilization, thereby reinforcing the strategic relevance of process integration across organizational boundaries (Melo & Alcântara, 2011). However, despite its growing adoption, BPM initiatives in public organizations frequently face challenges related to institutional rigidity, resistance to change, fragmented governance structures, and limited alignment between process management and digital technologies (Delgado et al., 2021; Szelągowski & Berniak-Woźny, 2024).
In the Brazilian public sector, these challenges are further intensified by the need to comply with legal frameworks, accountability requirements, and transparency principles. Since the 1990s, the Brazilian government has promoted digitalization initiatives through the Electronic Government (e-Gov) agenda, aiming to expand citizens’ access to public services and information. One of the most significant outcomes of this agenda has been the establishment of digital certification through the Brazilian Public Key Infrastructure (ICP-Brasil), instituted by Provisional Measure No. 2.200-2 of August 24, 2001. Digital certification provides legal validity, authenticity, and integrity to electronic documents and transactions, enabling new forms of interaction between government, organizations, and citizens.
Despite the technological maturity and legal consolidation of digital certification in Brazil, its integration into organizational processes remains uneven, particularly in public universities. In many cases, digital technologies are introduced in isolation, without a systematic redesign of underlying processes, which limits their potential to generate efficiency gains and organizational learning. The literature suggests that Digital Transformation should not be understood merely as the adoption of technologies, but rather as a multidimensional process that encompasses process redesign, governance structures, and cultural change (Gobble, 2018; Verhoef et al., 2019). From this perspective, BPM emerges as a strategic enabler capable of aligning digital technologies with organizational objectives and operational practices.
Although prior studies have examined BPM applications in the public sector, most contributions remain descriptive, focusing on isolated process improvements or tool adoption, with limited attention to how BPM and digital technologies converge strategically in complex public organizations such as universities. Moreover, empirical studies grounded in action research that provide detailed methodological pathways for implementing BPM programs integrated with specific digital technologies are still scarce. This gap is particularly evident in the context of higher education institutions, where administrative processes are often fragmented across organizational units and geographically dispersed campuses.
Against this backdrop, the scientific problem addressed in this study can be stated as follows: how can the strategic convergence between Business Process Management and Digital Information and Communication Technologies, particularly digital certification, be operationalized to improve administrative processes in public universities? Addressing this problem requires not only demonstrating operational improvements, but also explicating the methodological, organizational, and managerial conditions under which such convergence becomes effective.
Accordingly, the aim of this study is to analyze the development and implementation of a theoretical–practical BPM program in a Brazilian public university and to examine its strategic convergence with DICT through the adoption of digital certification in an administrative process. To achieve this aim, the study adopts an action research approach that enables the collaborative design, implementation, and evaluation of BPM practices within the organizational context.
The originality of this research lies in its integrated perspective, which combines BPM, action research, multi-criteria decision-making, and process simulation to investigate Digital Transformation in the public higher education sector. Rather than treating BPM as a mere process mapping technique, the study conceptualizes it as a managerial program that structures learning, governance, and decision-making while enabling the effective use of digital technologies. By doing so, the study contributes to the BPM and digital government literature by providing empirically grounded insights into how process management can act as a strategic driver of Digital Transformation in public universities.
From a practical standpoint, the study offers a replicable methodological pathway for public managers seeking to align BPM initiatives with digital technologies under conditions of organizational complexity and regulatory constraints. Additionally, it highlights critical success factors, such as top management support, communication, and capacity building, that are essential for sustaining BPM programs in digitally transforming public organizations. The findings are therefore relevant not only to academics, but also to practitioners and policymakers concerned with improving public sector performance and service delivery.
2 Theoretical background
This study is theoretically grounded on three interrelated pillars: BPM as a managerial discipline; Digital Transformation and its implications for public organizations; and the role of DICT, particularly digital certification, in enabling process redesign and organizational change. Together, these perspectives provide the conceptual foundation for understanding how BPM can strategically converge with digital technologies in public universities.
2.1 Business process management and digital transformation
Business Process Management has been widely conceptualized as a discipline that integrates methods, techniques, and technologies to design, analyze, implement, monitor, and continuously improve organizational processes (Smith & Fingar, 2007; Van der Aalst et al., 2003). From a process-oriented perspective, BPM challenges traditional functional and departmental structures by emphasizing end-to-end process flows, cross-functional coordination, and value creation for stakeholders (Davenport, 1994; Hammer & Champy, 1994; Gonçalves, 2000).
The BPM literature highlights that process orientation enables organizations to achieve greater transparency, consistency, and performance control, particularly using standardized modeling notations and performance indicators (Baldam et al., 2014). In this sense, BPM is not limited to process documentation or automation; rather, it constitutes a comprehensive managerial approach that encompasses strategy alignment, governance structures, organizational culture, and continuous improvement cycles (ABPMP, 2020). From a complementary perspective, Ayapbergenova & Yerimbetova (2022) emphasize that project management initiatives increasingly rely on teamwork involving both project teams and permanent organizational units. According to the authors, the integration of BPM technologies, such as workflow management systems, plays a critical role in maintaining procedural standards across organizational boundaries, although their effective implementation remains challenging, particularly in complex institutional environments.
To conceptualize BPM as a continuous and integrated managerial discipline, the Association of Business Process Management Professionals (ABPMP) proposed a cyclical model that structures process management activities into interrelated stages. This model reflects the consolidation of a common body of knowledge developed by academics, practitioners, and stakeholders, emphasizing continuous improvement and organizational learning. Figure 1 presents the BPM cycle proposed by the ABPMP (2013), illustrating its core phases and their iterative relationships.
In recent years, BPM research has increasingly intersected with the Digital Transformation agenda. Digital Transformation is commonly understood as a multi-stage process that includes digitization (conversion of analog information into digital form), digitalization (use of digital technologies to improve existing processes), and transformation (creation of new organizational models and value propositions based on digital capabilities) (Gobble, 2018; Verhoef et al., 2019). Building on this perspective, Bressanelli et al. (2018) conceptualize digital transformation as the most advanced stage of digital maturity, in which the exploitation of ICT capabilities enables the development of new business models grounded in continuous improvement principles and the circular economy. Within this framework, BPM has been identified as a critical enabler of Digital Transformation, as it provides the structural and analytical foundations necessary to align technological innovations with organizational processes and objectives (Denner et al., 2018; Fischer et al., 2020).
While digital transformation is often interpreted primarily as the adoption of advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or cloud computing, this study adopts a process-oriented perspective. From this viewpoint, digital transformation is not driven solely by technological artifacts, but by the redesign and governance of organizational processes that enable these technologies to generate value. In this sense, BPM functions as a structuring managerial discipline that mediates the relationship between digital technologies and organizational performance, ensuring that technological adoption is embedded within coherent process architectures. Recent systematic reviews further reinforce this perspective by showing that digital transformation initiatives increasingly rely on process-oriented approaches to integrate emerging technologies, although the literature still presents fragmented views and underexplored research streams, particularly regarding digital servitization ecosystems and value creation mechanisms (Facco et al., 2024).
At the core of the Digital Transformation agenda lie a set of emerging technologies that increasingly interact with BPM initiatives. These include blockchain, understood as a distributed and cryptographically secure data registration structure; the Internet of Things (IoT), particularly when integrated with high-speed communication networks such as 5G, enabling remote monitoring and control of physical assets; and machine learning techniques that leverage artificial intelligence and big data to automate tasks previously restricted to human decision-making (Hussein et al., 2018; Mendling et al., 2018).
Empirical studies suggest that organizations pursuing Digital Transformation without a clear process-oriented strategy often fail to realize the expected benefits of digital technologies. Process-based analyses, particularly in supply chain contexts, demonstrate that structured BPM models enable the identification of inefficiencies, critical processes, and coordination gaps, supporting managerial decision-making and operational performance improvements (Silva & Leite, 2024). Martinez (2019), for instance, demonstrates that process excellence and digitalization initiatives are interdependent, requiring formal BPM programs to guide technological adoption. Similarly, Ivanov et al. (2023) emphasize that digital technologies must be supported by appropriate organizational and regulatory frameworks to enhance efficiency and security. These findings reinforce the view that BPM serves as a mediating mechanism between technological potential and organizational performance.
Complementary evidence from digital service organizations indicates that design management practices, particularly those grounded in user-centered and interdisciplinary approaches, enhance organizational learning and strategic alignment, suggesting complementarities between BPM, design thinking, and Digital Transformation initiatives (Garbulho et al., 2020).
However, the strategic role of BPM in Digital Transformation is not uniformly realized across sectors. In digitally intensive environments such as Supply Chain 4.0, studies highlight that while technological integration enhances performance and coordination, it simultaneously introduces complex challenges related to data security, system reliability, regulatory constraints, and partial integration of organizational activities, reinforcing the need for structured managerial and process-oriented frameworks (Martins et al., 2020). While private organizations often leverage BPM to gain competitive advantages, public organizations face additional constraints related to legal compliance, accountability, and institutional stability. These characteristics necessitate adaptations in BPM implementation approaches, particularly with respect to governance, stakeholder engagement, and cultural change (Curtis, 2019; Safiullin & Akhmetshin, 2019a).
2.2 Digital information and communication technologies and digital certification
Digital Information and Communication Technologies constitute a central component of contemporary Digital Transformation initiatives. In the public sector, DICT have been associated with improvements in service delivery, transparency, and coordination across organizational units (Denner et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2018). Nevertheless, the effective use of these technologies depends on their integration into organizational processes rather than their isolated deployment. Empirical evidence suggests that, particularly in the public sector, the potential of digital technologies is often constrained by organizational and managerial limitations (Elezaj et al., 2018). Consequently, digital technologies should not be regarded as tools exclusively for IT professionals, but rather as enablers accessible to managers and professionals across organizational levels who seek to improve efficiency, risk management, and service provision. In this regard, prior studies highlight the importance of aligning digital technologies with management processes and organizational objectives to fully realize their transformative potential (Battisti et al., 2019; Safiullin & Akhmetshin, 2019b).
Among the various digital technologies adopted by public administrations, digital certification plays a particularly significant role due to its legal, organizational, and technological implications. Digital certificates are based on public key cryptography and enable secure identification, authentication, and integrity of electronic documents and transactions (Hunt, 2001; Braga, 2008; Ferneda et al., 2011). In Brazil, digital certification is regulated by the Brazilian Public Key Infrastructure (ICP-Brasil), established by Provisional Measure No. 2.200-2 of August 24, 2001, and coordinated by the National Institute of Information Technology (ITI).
The ICP-Brasil model adopts a single-root certification structure, ensuring legal validity and trust across electronic transactions in government-to-government (G2G), government-to-business (G2B), and government-to-citizen (G2C) interactions. Studies on public key infrastructures highlight that digital certification can significantly reduce transaction costs, enhance security, and promote interoperability when properly integrated into organizational processes (Patsos et al., 2010).
In the context of higher education, digital certification has gained prominence with the introduction of digital diplomas in Brazil, regulated by the Ministry of Education ordinances. The digital diploma represents not merely a digital version of a paper document, but a fundamentally redesigned artifact whose legal validity, authenticity, and preservation depend on standardized digital signatures and metadata structures (Lepiane et al., 2019). As such, its implementation requires substantial changes in administrative processes, information systems, and governance arrangements.
The literature emphasizes that the adoption of digital certification without corresponding process redesign may lead to partial or suboptimal outcomes. From a BPM perspective, digital certification should be embedded into redesigned process flows that eliminate redundancies, reduce manual interventions, and enhance traceability. This reinforces the need for BPM as a structuring discipline capable of orchestrating the interaction between digital technologies and organizational processes.
2.3 BPM in the public sector
The application of BPM in the public sector has attracted increasing scholarly attention, driven by the need to improve efficiency, accountability, and service quality under conditions of fiscal constraint and institutional complexity. Prior studies demonstrate that BPM can contribute to reducing bureaucracy, standardizing procedures, and improving transparency in public organizations, including higher education institutions (Costa et al., 2016; García-González, 2016).
However, BPM implementation in public organizations is often constrained by rigid organizational structures, resistance to change, and limited managerial autonomy. Research by Hernaus et al. (2016) and Bandara et al. (2018) highlights the importance of institutionalizing BPM through governance mechanisms, such as process offices or centers of excellence, and securing sustained top management support. Similarly, Waal & Batenburg (2014) and Mückenberger et al. (2013) emphasize the critical role of stakeholder involvement and user participation in ensuring the success of BPM initiatives.
Despite these insights, the literature reveals a predominance of descriptive case studies, with limited analytical depth regarding the strategic convergence between BPM and digital technologies. Alotaibi (2016) identifies persistent challenges related to aligning BPM objectives with information technology strategies, managing information security, and coping with dynamic organizational environments. More recent studies suggest that addressing these challenges requires integrating BPM with broader Digital Transformation strategies, rather than treating it as a standalone managerial tool.
Taken together, the theoretical perspectives discussed in this section underscore the relevance of investigating BPM not merely as a method for process mapping or automation, but as a strategic program that enables Digital Transformation in public organizations. By integrating BPM with digital certification technology in a public university context, this study builds upon and extends existing literature, offering a theoretically informed and empirically grounded examination of how process management and digital technologies can converge to generate organizational value.
3 Methodology
This study adopts an action research methodology, as it seeks to simultaneously investigate and improve organizational practices through the active involvement of researchers and organizational members. Action research is particularly suitable for complex public-sector contexts, where knowledge generation is closely intertwined with problem-solving and organizational change (Thiollent, 2009). In this study, action research enabled the collaborative design, implementation, and evaluation of a BPM program integrated with DICT in a Brazilian public university.
3.1 Research design and methodological approach
Action research is defined as an empirical and participatory research strategy conducted in close association with a collective action aimed at addressing a concrete organizational problem (Thiollent, 2009). Following the methodological guidance proposed by Westbrook (1995), Coughlan & Coghlan (2002), and Mello et al. (2012), the research was structured into five iterative and interrelated phases: planning; data collection; data analysis and action planning; action implementation; and evaluation and reporting.
To enhance methodological transparency and support the replicability of the study, the action research process was organized into a structured and iterative sequence of phases. These phases reflect the logical progression of planning, empirical investigation, collective analysis, intervention, and evaluation adopted throughout the research. Figure 2 illustrates the five phases of the action research approach applied in this study and their iterative nature, providing a visual representation of the methodological pathway followed from the initial planning stage to evaluation and reporting.
This structure ensured methodological rigor and transparency, allowing the research process to be documented and replicated in similar organizational contexts. The researchers participated as facilitators and observers throughout the process, while organizational actors, such as managers, technical staff, and process owners, actively contributed to data collection, decision-making, and implementation activities.
3.2 Unit of analysis and research context
The unit of analysis comprises the administrative processes of a Brazilian public university, specifically those conducted within the General Secretary’s Office. This unit was selected due to its central role in coordinating academic records, administrative procedures, and interactions between the university, its departments, and external stakeholders.
The General Secretary’s Office encompasses multiple technical groups responsible for activities such as academic record management, document handling, and diploma issuance and registration. Prior to this study, these processes were largely undocumented, fragmented, and dependent on tacit knowledge, which limited transparency, standardization, and performance monitoring. This context provided a suitable environment for implementing and evaluating a BPM program integrated with digital technologies.
3.3 Data collection procedures
Data collection was conducted using multiple complementary techniques to enhance reliability and triangulation. First, participant observation was employed, as the researchers were formally involved in the institutional working group responsible for process modeling and optimization. This approach enabled direct access to organizational routines, decision-making processes, and informal practices.
Second, document analysis was performed on internal regulations, administrative records, process-related documents, and legal frameworks governing digital certification and diploma issuance. These documents provided essential contextual information and supported the formalization of process models.
Third, structured process mapping forms were used to systematically collect information on process objectives, inputs, outputs, actors, activities, decision points, and information systems. These forms were developed by the working group based on BPM literature and institutional requirements. Although the instrument was not previously validated in the literature, its structure was grounded in established BPM principles (ABPMP, 2013; Baldam et al., 2014) and refined through iterative application and feedback during the research process.
Additionally, data related to process performance, such as task sequences, processing times, and workload distribution, were collected to support subsequent modeling, prioritization, and simulation activities.
3.4 Development and institutionalization of the BPM program
The BPM program was developed and institutionalized through a sequence of structured actions. Initially, a multidisciplinary working group was formally established by an institutional ordinance, ensuring top management support and organizational legitimacy. The group defined a standard BPM methodology combining BPMN notation and the PDCA (Plan–Do–Check–Act) cycle.
Subsequently, a computational modeling tool (Bizagi, 2025) was selected, and standardized instruments for process documentation and prioritization were defined. A pilot area was chosen to test the methodology, followed by communication initiatives aimed at raising awareness across organizational units. These steps culminated in the official launch of the BPM program and the publication of modeled processes on an institutional platform, promoting transparency and knowledge sharing.
4 Developments and results
This section presents the main stages and results of the action research.
4.1 Training of process architects
To ensure methodological consistency and organizational learning, a structured training program was developed for process architects, employees responsible for modeling and analyzing processes within their respective units. The training combined theoretical content on BPM concepts and BPMN notation with practical exercises using the Bizagi Modeler.
The training was delivered through a virtual learning environment and supported by active learning methodologies. At the end of the program, a reaction evaluation was conducted using a structured questionnaire assessing content relevance, resources, instructional support, and overall satisfaction. The results of this evaluation informed minor adjustments to future training iterations and reinforced the importance of capacity building as a critical success factor for BPM implementation. Table 1 summarizes the results of the reaction evaluation applied to the training program.
4.2 Process mapping, modeling, and prioritization
All identified critical processes within the General Secretary’s Office were mapped and modeled using BPMN notation. The AS-IS models provided a shared and explicit representation of current practices, facilitating the identification of bottlenecks, redundancies, and non-value-adding activities. Chart 1 identifies and clarifies the process acronyms of the processes within the General Secretary’s Office.
Given the number and diversity of processes, a prioritization step was necessary to identify those with the greatest potential impact. For this purpose, the AHP was employed as a multi-criteria decision-making method (Saaty, 1990). The global objective of the AHP application was to rank administrative processes according to their criticality. Figure 3 presents the hierarchical structure adopted for the AHP application, including the overall objective, the evaluation criteria, and the alternative administrative processes considered, thereby clarifying how the prioritization decision was operationalized. The valid criteria used to compose the criteria vector of the decision matrix was based on the research by Gonçalves et al. (2020). The pairwise comparison matrices and consistency indicators used in the AHP model are presented in Appendix A (13) to enhance methodological transparency and facilitate replication of the prioritization procedure.
Table 2 presents the resulting decision matrix based on the judgments.
To identify the administrative process with the highest potential impact for redesign and digital integration, the results of the AHP were consolidated into a prioritization ranking. This ranking reflects the relative criticality of each process based on the evaluated criteria, including workload, number of activities, and number of involved actors. Table 3 presents the final prioritization results, highlighting the Issuance and Registration of Diplomas process (P4) as the most critical, thus justifying its selection for detailed analysis, redesign, and subsequent simulation.
Based on the prioritization results, the Issuance and Registration of Diplomas process was selected for in-depth modelling and analysis. The current-state (AS-IS) process was mapped using BPMN notation to provide a detailed and shared representation of existing activities, decision points, actors, and information flows. Figure 4 illustrates the AS-IS model of this process, serving as the analytical baseline for identifying inefficiencies, redundancies, and non-value-adding activities that informed the subsequent redesign and simulation stages.
4.3 Process redesign
The prioritized process was redesigned through the development of a TO-BE model incorporating digital certification technology. This redesign aimed to eliminate redundant activities, reduce manual interventions, and enhance process traceability and security across the process flow. Figure 5 illustrates the TO-BE model of the diploma issuing and registration process, highlighting the integration of digital certification into the redesigned workflow.
To evaluate the expected performance improvements, the AS-IS and TO-BE models were simulated using the Bizagi Modeler. Simulation parameters, including arrival rates, processing times, and resource allocation, were defined based on empirical data and expert judgment. Comparative simulation results provided quantitative evidence of efficiency gains, supporting decision-making prior to full-scale implementation, as described in the following section.
4.4 Efficiency analysis via modeling and simulation
The time parameters used for the simulation model, detailed here, were determined from the data analysis of the University’s institutional system, to which the researcher had broad access. These parameters were derived from historical operational data extracted from the university’s academic management information system, which records diploma registration requests, processing stages, and completion times. This system provided reliable administrative records that allowed the estimation of average processing volumes and time distributions used in the simulation scenarios. The variations of these parameters are not significant, considering the simulation objectives of this study. Yet, it can be highlighted that Bizagi also offered the opportunity to carry out probabilistic distribution analyses. From the data collection, a model could be drawn up that approximates the average number of diplomas registered each month (not necessarily delivered to graduates, given the logistics of delivering the diplomas to the Departments of this University institution).
844 diploma registration requests were completed, on average, each month. With this average it was possible to define, regarding the AS-IS model as much as the TO-BE model, the properties of the Bizagi simulation scenario for a period of 30 days, as well as the “arrival interval in minutes” (given as Number of days x 1440/average of diplomas registered) that best fits the model to the reality, according to Table 4.
Task times were not recorded in batches, but in units, given the limitations of Bizagi regarding batch processing. Therefore, times were estimated taking into account the arrival interval calculation and the global exit scenario of the process. Regarding the decision elements (gateways), in AS-IS, the first was validated taking into consideration the average rate of diligences (adjustments that needed to be made for the continuation of the process) forwarded in a one-month period (32% in relation to the average of instances concluded per month), while the second and third decision points took into consideration the average rate of cancellations made in a period of one month (2% in relation to the average of instances concluded per month). The resources attributed to tasks referring to the simulation scenario are organized in the following manner: Server 1, Server 2, Server 3, Server 4, and Server UU1.
To simulate the AS-IS and TO-BE models, the following indicators were used for the purpose of comparison: number of instances concluded; number of tasks; number of decision points (gateways) and the total average activity time of the simulation scenario over a period of 30 days. The comparisons can be seen in Table 5.
It can be seen that the number of instances concluded - in other words, diplomas effectively delivered - when digital certification was introduced in the TO-BE model, increased with a productivity increment in the order of 76%. Furthermore, when the graphic notation of both scenarios is analyzed, regarding the tasks and decision points, a respective reduction of 44% and 50% is identified.
Such differences are explicit comparing Figures 4 and 5. The introduction of digital certification (TO-BE model) completely eliminated the milestone (which indicates phases within the process or demarcated time periods) present in the AS-IS model. This occurrence is due to the fact that in the TO-BE model, the tasks “Sign digitally” and “Send via unique system URL of the Digital Diploma (XML) to the graduate”, which specifically involve the application of the digital certificate, enabled the elimination of activities which no longer add value to the process.
The comparison of the indicator “Average total activity time for the simulation scenario” mirrors the efficiency gains in the TO-BE model, resulting in the distribution of activities and workload in the line of production/sector and, consequently in the express reduction of diploma delivery lead time, thereby proving the potential of digital certification technology for the optimization of process flows.
4.5 Reliability, replicability, and ethical considerations
Methodological rigor was ensured through detailed documentation of each research phase, use of standardized modeling notation, triangulation of data sources, and collaborative validation of results with organizational participants. The step-by-step structure of the action research process provides a clear methodological pathway that can be replicated in similar public-sector contexts. In addition, the research artifacts developed during the project, including the process mapping template, the AHP prioritization structure, and the BPMN models of the analyzed processes, constitute methodological resources that can support replication of similar initiatives in other organizations. Future work may further strengthen open research practices by making these artifacts publicly available through digital repositories.
In addition, part of the research artifacts generated during the BPM program implementation, including process maps and modeled flows, are publicly available through the institutional webpage of the university (UNESP, 2026 a, b).
These resources contribute to transparency and enable other researchers and practitioners to explore and reuse the process models developed during the project.
Ethical considerations were addressed by ensuring transparency, voluntary participation, and institutional authorization for data collection and process analysis. No personal or sensitive data were disclosed in the research outputs.
5 Discussion
The results of this study provide important managerial implications for public sector organizations seeking to implement BPM initiatives as part of broader digital transformation strategies. The findings demonstrate that the effectiveness of BPM programs in complex institutional environments depends on the careful sequencing of implementation stages. In the case analyzed, the initiative progressed through a structured pathway involving: (a) formal institutional support from top management, (b) training and capacity building of process architects, (c) collaborative process mapping and modeling, (d) data-driven prioritization using multi-criteria decision methods, and (e) the integration of digital technologies into redesigned process flows. This sequence provides a practical roadmap for public managers facing organizational resistance and institutional constraints.
Beyond operational efficiency, the results also highlight the generation of public value associated with process improvements in higher education administration. Faster diploma issuance reduces uncertainty for graduates who require their academic credentials to access employment opportunities or pursue further studies. Additionally, the adoption of digitally certified diplomas enhances transparency and traceability, reducing the risk of document fraud and strengthening trust in academic institutions. From a public administration perspective, these improvements demonstrate how BPM and digital technologies can translate internal process optimization into tangible societal benefits.
The implementation process also revealed organizational tensions related to transparency and process standardization. In some units, initial resistance emerged due to concerns that greater visibility of internal procedures could reduce perceived operational autonomy or reveal local practices previously managed informally. Such reactions reflect a broader challenge in public sector digital transformation initiatives, where the pursuit of transparency and standardization may confront established institutional routines. Addressing these tensions requires strong governance structures, effective communication strategies, and sustained leadership support.
6 Conclusions
This study addressed the scientific problem of how BPM can strategically converge with DICT, particularly digital certification, to improve administrative processes in public universities. While BPM and digital technologies have been extensively discussed in the literature, empirical evidence demonstrating how this convergence can be operationalized in complex public-sector contexts remains limited. In response to this gap, the study aimed to analyze the development and implementation of a theoretical–practical BPM program and to examine its integration with digital certification in a Brazilian public university through an action research approach.
The findings demonstrate that BPM can function as a strategic enabler of Digital Transformation when it is implemented as an institutional program rather than as an isolated process-mapping initiative. By structuring a BPM program supported by top management, standardized methodologies, and capacity building, the university was able to redesign a critical administrative process, the issuing and registering of diplomas, through the incorporation of digital certification technology. The redesigned process eliminated non-value-adding activities, reduced manual handling, and enhanced transparency, traceability, and process performance. Simulation results provided quantitative support for these improvements, reinforcing the role of BPM as a decision-support mechanism in digitally driven organizational change.
From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the BPM and digital government literature by empirically illustrating the role of BPM between digital technologies and organizational performance in the public sector. Rather than conceptualizing Digital Transformation as a technology-centered phenomenon, the findings support a process-oriented view in which BPM structures governance, learning, and decision-making, thereby enabling digital technologies to generate tangible organizational value. The study also extends prior research by integrating BPM, action research, multi-criteria decision-making, and process simulation into a coherent analytical framework applicable to public universities.
In terms of practical implications, the study offers a replicable methodological pathway for public managers and practitioners seeking to align process management initiatives with digital technologies under conditions of institutional complexity and regulatory constraint. The step-by-step approach, including the institutionalization of a BPM program, training of process architects, prioritization of processes using the AHP, and simulation-based evaluation, can inform similar initiatives in other public organizations. Additionally, the study highlights critical success factors such as top management support, structured communication, and organizational learning, which are essential for sustaining BPM programs in digitally transforming public institutions.
Despite its contributions, the study has limitations that should be acknowledged. The research was conducted in a single public university, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other organizational contexts. Moreover, the action research approach, while suitable for in-depth organizational analysis, involves close researcher participation, which may introduce contextual biases. Future studies could address these limitations by conducting comparative analyses across multiple institutions, applying longitudinal designs to assess long-term impacts, and examining the role of organizational culture and governance mechanisms in sustaining BPM initiatives.
Future research may also explore the identification and measurement of critical success factors for BPM programs in the public sector, the integration of BPM with emerging digital technologies, and the evaluation of digital transformation outcomes beyond operational efficiency, such as citizen satisfaction and public value creation. By advancing these research agendas, scholars and practitioners can further strengthen the theoretical and practical foundations of BPM as a strategic driver of Digital Transformation in public organizations.
Appendix A Pairwise Comparison Matrices and Consistency Indicators of the AHP Model.
This appendix presents the matrices used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) application for prioritizing administrative processes in the General Secretary’s Office of the university studied. The matrices were constructed following the methodology proposed by Saaty (1990), which is based on pairwise comparisons to determine the relative importance of evaluation criteria and alternatives.
The decision model considered three criteria:
(i) number of actors involved in the process.
(ii) workload associated with the process.
(iii) number of activities composing the process flow.
The judgments were provided by the manager responsible for the General Secretary’s processes and were processed using an Excel spreadsheet to calculate weights, priorities, and consistency indicators.
1 presents the pairwise comparison matrix used to determine the relative weights of the evaluation criteria, as well as the calculated eigenvector and normalized priority vector.
Table A1 Judgments Matrix for Criteria Comparison.| Criteria | Nº of actors | Workload | Nº of activities | Auto Vector | Normalized Auto Vector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nº of actors | 1 | 1/7 | 1/5 | 0.305710709 | 7% |
| Workload | 7 | 1 | 3 | 2.758924176 | 65% |
| Nº of activities | 5 | 1/3 | 1 | 1.185631101 | 28% |
| Total | 13 | 1.476190476 | 4.2 | 4.250265987 | 100% |
Consistency indicators
λ-max = 3.06488758
Consistency Index (CI) = 0.03244379
Consistency Ratio (CR) = 5.59%
The calculated consistency ratio is below the acceptable threshold of 0.10, indicating that the judgments used in the pairwise comparisons are consistent and suitable for decision-making.
2 presents the matrix used to determine the relative importance of the administrative processes according to the number of activities criterion.
Table A2 Matrix for Number of Activities Criterion.| Processes | Nº of activities | Normalization |
|---|---|---|
| P1 | 6 | 3% |
| P2 | 4 | 2% |
| P3 | 11 | 5% |
| P4 | 44 | 20% |
| P5 | 20 | 9% |
| P6 | 6 | 3% |
| P7 | 32 | 15% |
| P8 | 42 | 19% |
| P9 | 16 | 7% |
| P10 | 38 | 17% |
| Total | 219 | 100% |
3 presents the matrix used to determine the relative importance of the administrative processes according to the workload criterion, calculated from the relationship between the frequency and the time required to execute each process.
Table A3 Matrix for Workload Criterion.| Processes | Frequency (days) | Time (days) | Workload | Normalization |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 104 | 1 | 104 | 6% |
| P2 | 365 | 1 | 365 | 20% |
| P3 | 2 | 6 | 12 | 1% |
| P4 | 365 | 3 | 1095 | 59% |
| P5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0% |
| P6 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 0% |
| P7 | 40 | 1 | 40 | 2% |
| P8 | 30 | 3 | 90 | 5% |
| P9 | 70 | 1 | 70 | 4% |
| P10 | 80 | 1 | 80 | 4% |
| Total | 1058 | 23 | 1862 | 100% |
Statement on Data Availability
The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
-
Financial support:
None.
-
How to cite:
Palacios, V. S., Campos, R., Rodrigues, J. S. & Goussain, B. G. C. S. (2026). Strategic convergence of Business Process Management and digital information technologies: action research of implementing BPM in a Brazilian public university. Gestão & Produção, 33, e6025. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2026v33e6025
References
-
ABPMP. (2013). Guia para o gerenciamento de processos de negócio corpo comum de conhecimento ABPMP BPM CBOK V3.0 Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.abpmp.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/ABPMP_CBOK_Guide__Portuguese.pdf
» https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.abpmp.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/ABPMP_CBOK_Guide__Portuguese.pdf - ABPMP. (2020). Guia para o gerenciamento de processos de negócio corpo comum de conhecimento ABPMP BPM CBOK V4.0. São Paulo: ABPMP.
-
Alotaibi, Y. (2016). Business process modelling challenges and solutions: a literature review. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 27(4), 701-723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-014-0917-4
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-014-0917-4 -
Ayapbergenova, A., & Yerimbetova, A. (2022). Project management technology in creating a business process management information system at the present stage of development of the telecommunications sector of Kazakhstan. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 5(119), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2022.261091
» https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2022.261091 -
Baldam, R., Valle, R., & Rozenfeld, H. (2014). Gerenciamento de processos de negócio: uma referência para implantação prática. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Gerenciamento_de_Processos_de_Neg%C3%B3cio_B.html?id=e1YaBQAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
» https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Gerenciamento_de_Processos_de_Neg%C3%B3cio_B.html?id=e1YaBQAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y -
Bandara, W., Bailey, S., Mathiesen, P., Mccarthy, J., & Jones, C. (2018). Enterprise Business Process Management in the public sector: the case of the Department of Human Services (DHS) Australia. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 8(2), 217-231. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41266-017-0031-5
» https://doi.org/10.1057/s41266-017-0031-5 -
Battisti, E., Shams, S. M. R., Sakka, G., & Miglietta, N. (2019). Big data and risk management in business processes: implications for corporate real estate. Business Process Management Journal, 26(5), 1141-1155. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2019-0125
» https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2019-0125 -
Bizagi. (2025). What if analysis Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from http://help.bizagi.com/process-modeler/en/index.html?simulation_in_bizagi.htm
» http://help.bizagi.com/process-modeler/en/index.html?simulation_in_bizagi.htm -
Braga, L. V. (2008). Contribuições da certificação digital ao desenvolvimento do governo eletrônico e aperfeiçoamento de políticas públicas e serviços públicos no Brasil (Master’s thesis). Universidade Católica de Brasília, Brasília. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://bdtd.ucb.br:8443/jspui/handle/123456789/1552
» https://bdtd.ucb.br:8443/jspui/handle/123456789/1552 -
Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M., & Saccani, N. (2018). Exploring how usage-focused business models enable circular economy through digital technologies. Sustainability, 10(3), 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030639
» https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030639 -
Costa, C. A. A., Tonolli, E. J., Jr, & De Oliveira, J. R. (2016). Avaliação do BPM e BMPS no setor de manutenção de uma IES. Sistemas & Gestão, 11(2), 133-149. https://doi.org/10.20985/1980-5160.2016.v11n2.699
» https://doi.org/10.20985/1980-5160.2016.v11n2.699 -
Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 220-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210417515
» https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210417515 -
Curtis, S. (2019). Digital transformation: the silver bullet to public service improvement? Public Money & Management, 39(5), 322-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1611233
» https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1611233 -
Davenport, T. H. (1994). Reengenharia de processos: como inovar na empresa através da tecnologia da informação. Rio de Janeiro: Campus. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Reengenharia_de_processo.html?id=eU_YZwEACAAJ&redir_esc=y
» https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Reengenharia_de_processo.html?id=eU_YZwEACAAJ&redir_esc=y -
Delgado, A., Montarnal, A., Astudillo, H., & Cabanillas, C. (2021). Introduction to the Digital Government and Business Process Management (BPM) minitrack HICSS’54. In Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Honolulu: University of Hawai. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.253
» https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.253 -
Delgado, A., García, F., & Astudillo, H. (2022). Introduction to the Digital Government and Business Process Management (BPM) minitrack HICSS’55. In Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Honolulu: University of Hawai. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2022.294
» https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2022.294 -
Denner, M. S., Puschel, L. C., & Roglinger, M. (2018). How to exploit the digitalization potential of business processes. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(4), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0509-x
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0509-x -
Elezaj, O., Tole, D., & Baci, N. (2018). Big data in e-government environments: albania as a case study. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 7(2), 117-124. https://doi.org/10.2478/ajis-2018-0052
» https://doi.org/10.2478/ajis-2018-0052 -
Facco, G., Cauchick-Miguel, P. A., & Sousa Zommer, T. T. (2024). Digital transformation in servitization: analysis of technologies and dominant themes. Gestão & Produção, 31, e11524. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e11524
» https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e11524 -
Favoretto, C., Mendes, G. H. S., & Candido, S. E. A. R. (2019). Inovação nos modelos de negócios através da digitalização: Uma revisão sistemática. In XXXIX Enegep Rio de Janeiro: ABEPRO. https://doi.org/10.14488/ENEGEP2019_TN_STO_290_1634_37576
» https://doi.org/10.14488/ENEGEP2019_TN_STO_290_1634_37576 -
Ferneda, E., Alonso, L. B. N., & Braga, L. V. (2011). Digital certification in the Brazilian e-government. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 8(2), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.4301/s1807-17752011000200004
» https://doi.org/10.4301/s1807-17752011000200004 -
Fischer, M., Imgrund, F., Janiesch, C., & Winkelmann, A. (2020). Strategy archetypes for digital transformation: defining meta objectives using business process management. Information & Management, 57(5), 103262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103262
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103262 -
Garbulho, G. S., Fleury, A. L., & Ferreira, E. C. K. (2020). Assessing the impact of design on the development of digital services. Gestão & Produção, 27(4), e4135. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530x4135-20
» https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530x4135-20 -
García-González, M. (2016). E-Government: the need to implement a business processes management policy in public administration. El Profesional de la Información, 25(3), 473-483. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.17
» https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.17 -
Gobble, M. A. M. (2018). Digital strategy and digital transformation. Research Technology Management, 61(5), 66-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1495969
» https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1495969 -
Gonçalves, J. E. L. (2000). Processo, que processo?Revista de Administração de Empresas, 40(4), 8-19. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902000000400002
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902000000400002 -
Gonçalves, R. S. R., Palacios, V. S., Padula, D., Campos, R., & Rodrigues, J. S. (2020). Multi-Criteria Decision Making and the validation of indicators for process prioritization in BPM. In XXVI IJCIEOM - International Joint Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Rio de Janeiro: ABEPRO. https://doi.org/10.14488/IJCIEOM2020_FULL_0001_37309
» https://doi.org/10.14488/IJCIEOM2020_FULL_0001_37309 -
Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1994). Reengenharia: revolucionando a empresa em função dos clientes, da concorrência e das grandes mudanças da gerência (29. ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Editora Campus. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Reengenharia.html?id=ojoiAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
» https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Reengenharia.html?id=ojoiAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y -
Hernaus, T., Bosilj Vuksic, V., & Indihar Štemberger, M. (2016). How to go from strategy to results? Institutionalising BPM governance within organisations. Business Process Management Journal, 22(1), 173-195. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2015-0031
» https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2015-0031 -
Hunt, R. (2001). Technological infrastructure for PKI and digital certification. Computer Communications, 24(14), 1460-1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-3664(01)00293-6
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-3664(01)00293-6 -
Hussein, D., Taha, M. H. N., & Khalifa, N. E. M. (2018). A blockchain technology evolution between Business Process Management (BPM) and Internet-of-Things (IoT). International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 9(8), 442-450. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2018.090856
» https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2018.090856 -
Ivanov, M. G., Ivanova, O. M., Kalinichenko, A. I., Galiev, M. S., & Semenova, M. (2023). A digitalization in business management: issues of legal regulation and protection. Studies in Big Data, 124, 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29489-1_2
» https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29489-1_2 -
Lepiane, C. D., Pereira, F. L., Pieri, G., Martins, D., Martina, J. E., & Rabelo, M. L. (2019). Digital degree certificates for higher education in brazil: a technical policy specification. In ACM Symposium on Document Engineering Berlin: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342558.3345398
» https://doi.org/10.1145/3342558.3345398 -
Martinez, F. (2019). Process excellence the key for digitalisation. Business Process Management Journal, 25(7), 1716-1733. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-08-2018-0237
» https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-08-2018-0237 -
Martins, F. C., Simon, A. T., & Campos, R. S. (2020). Supply Chain 4.0 challenges. Gestão & Produção, 27(3), e5427. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530x5427-20
» https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530x5427-20 -
Mello, C. H. P., Turrioni, J. B., Xavier, A. F., & Campos, D. F. (2012). Action research in production engineering: a structure proposal for its conduction. Production, 22, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132011005000056
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132011005000056 -
Melo, D. C., & Alcântara, R. L. C. (2011). Demand management on supply chains: more than sales forecast. Gestão & Produção, 18(4), 809-824. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-530X2011000400009
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-530X2011000400009 -
Mendling, J., Decker, G., Reijers, H. A., Hull, R., & Weber, I. (2018). How do machine learning, robotic process automation, and blockchains affect the human factor in business process management? Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 43(1), 297-320. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04319
» https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04319 -
Mückenberger, E., Togashi, G. B., Pádua, S. I. D. D., & Miura, I. K. (2013). Process management applied to the establishment of international bilateral agreements in a Brazilian public institution of high education. Production, 23, 637-651. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132012005000076
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132012005000076 -
Patsos, D., Ciechanowicz, C., & Piper, F. (2010). The status of national PKIs - A European overview. Information Security Technical Report, 15(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istr.2010.10.007
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istr.2010.10.007 -
Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 5(1), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
» https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I -
Safiullin, M. R., & Akhmetshin, E. M. (2019a). Digital transformation of a university as a factor of ensuring its competitiveness. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 9(1), 7387-7390. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.A3097.109119
» https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.A3097.109119 -
Safiullin, M. R., & Akhmetshin, E. M. (2019b). Methodological to digital transformation of educational, research and business activity of a university. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 9(1), 7391-7394. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.A3098.109119
» https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.A3098.109119 -
Silva, J. S., & Leite, M. S. A. (2024). Analysis of a supply chain in the ceramic sector: A look at business processes. Gestão & Produção, 31, e12021. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e12021
» https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2024v31e12021 -
Smith, H., & Fingar, P. (2007). Business Process Management (BPM): the third wave (311 p.). Tampa: Meghan-Kiffer Press. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Business_Process_Management.html?id=I0Y7AAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
» https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Business_Process_Management.html?id=I0Y7AAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y -
Szelągowski, M., & Berniak-Woźny, J. (2024). BPM challenges, limitations and future development directions – a systematic literature review. Business Process Management Journal, 30(2), 505-557. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2023-0419
» https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2023-0419 -
Thiollent, M. (2009). Metodologia da pesquisa-ação São Paulo: Cortez. Retrieved in 2025, June 11, from https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Metodologia_da_pesquisa_a%C3%A7%C3%A3o.html?id=_edSywAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
» https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Metodologia_da_pesquisa_a%C3%A7%C3%A3o.html?id=_edSywAACAAJ&redir_esc=y -
UNESP. (2026a). Modelagem de fluxo de dados São Paulo: Unesp. Retrieved in 2026, March 5, from https://www2.unesp.br/portal#!/ai/grupos-de-trabalho/modelagem-de-fluxos
» https://www2.unesp.br/portal#!/ai/grupos-de-trabalho/modelagem-de-fluxos -
UNESP. (2026b). Fluxos modelados – Secretaria geral São Paulo: Unesp. Retrieved in 2026, March 5, from https://www2.unesp.br/portal#!/ai/grupos-de-trabalho/modelagem-de-fluxos/fluxos-modelados/secretaria-geral
» https://www2.unesp.br/portal#!/ai/grupos-de-trabalho/modelagem-de-fluxos/fluxos-modelados/secretaria-geral -
Van der Aalst, W. M. P., Ter Hofstede, A. H. M., & Weske, M. (2003). Business process management: a survey. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2678, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44895-0_1
» https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44895-0_1 -
Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2019). Digital transformation: a multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022 -
Waal, B. M. E., & Batenburg, R. (2014). The process and structure of user participation: A BPM system implementation case study. Business Process Management Journal, 20(1), 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-05-2012-0045
» https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-05-2012-0045 -
Westbrook, R. (1995). Action research: a new paradigm for research in production and operation management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(12), 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579510104466
» https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579510104466 -
Xu, L. D., Xu, E. L., & Li, L. (2018). Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends. International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2941-2962. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806
» https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806
-
Editor-in-Chief
Pedro Munari
