Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe continuous redesign of processes is crucial for companies in times of tough competition and fast‐changing surrounding conditions. Since the manual redesign of processes is a time‐ and resource‐consuming task, automated redesign will increasingly become a useful alternative. Hence, future redesign projects need to be valuated based on both a manual and an automated redesign approach. The purpose of this paper is to compare the manual and automated process redesign on the basis of the Business Process Management (BPM) lifecycle.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors compare the manual and automated process redesign on the basis of the Business Process Management (BPM) lifecycle. The results form the basis for a mathematical model that outlines the general economic characteristics of process redesign as well as for the manual and automated approaches. Subsequently, the authors exemplarily apply their model to a set of empirical data with respective assumptions on particular aspects of the automated approach.FindingsIn the problem setting described in the paper, the valuation model shows that automated process redesign induces an equal or higher number of optimized processes in a company. Therefore, the authors present a decision support that outlines how much to invest in automated process redesign.Research limitations/implicationsThe model considers the cost side of automated process redesign; therefore, further research should be conducted to analyze the possibility of higher returns induced by automated redesign (e.g., through a quicker adaption to real‐world changes). Moreover, for automated redesign, there is no requirement for broad empirical data that should be collected and analyzed as soon as this approach leaves the basic research and prototyping stages.Practical implicationsThis paper presents an approach that can be used by companies to estimate the upper limit for investments in manual and automated process redesign. Working under certain general assumptions and independently from actual cost and return values, the paper demonstrates that automated process redesign induces an equal or higher ratio of optimized processes. Thus, companies introducing automated redesign cannot only apply the model to evaluate their investments but can also expect a higher ratio of optimized processes for this approach.Originality/valueAs existing literature primarily focuses on the technical aspects of automated process redesign, these findings contribute to the current body of literature. This paper discusses a first decision‐support for the economic aspects of automated process redesign, particularly with regard to the investments that are required for it. This information is relevant as soon as the approach leaves the stage of a prototype.

User-centric identity management systems are gaining momentum as concerns about Big Tech and Big Government rise. Many of these systems are framed as offering Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI). Yet, competing appropriation and the social embedding of SSI have resulted in diverging interpretations. These vague and value-laden interpretations can damage the public discourse and risk misrepresenting values and affordances that technology offers to users. To unpack the various social and technical understandings of SSI, we adopt an 'interpretive flexibility' lens. Based on a qualitative inductive interview study, we find that SSI's interpretation is strongly mediated by surrounding institutional properties. Our study helps to better navigate these different perceptions and highlights the need for a multidimensional framework that can improve the understanding of complex socio-technical systems for digital government practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers.

To combat climate change, many countries all around the world currently foster the development of renewable energy sources (RES). However, in contrast to traditional energy systems that relied on few central power plants, RES are typically highly decentral and spread all over a country. Against this backdrop, the promotion of a decentralization of the energy system by fostering a regional balance of energy demand and supply with a corresponding increase in energy democracy is seen as a promising approach. However, energy democracy driven by an increasing involvement of consumers requires adequate investments of consumers in their own local RES in order to become active players, usually called prosumers. Risk associated with uncertain long-term electricity price developments is generally seen as a barrier to investments. In contrast, we describe that an investment in distributed energy resources (DERs) may actually serve as a consumer's insurance against price risk. Our results set out that the consideration of risk-aversion may actually positively shift an investment decision in renewable DERs. This is due to the prosumer becoming more self-sufficient and less dependent on uncertain price developments. To analyze such an insurance effect, we create a formal decision model considering the prosumer's risk-aversion and derive the prosumer's optimal investment in renewable DERs. However, our results also indicate that under some circumstances the insurance effect disappears: When a prosumer turns into a predominant producer, the prosumer is again exposed to risk in terms of uncertain revenues. Ultimately, our work highlights the importance of a consideration of the insurance effect when assessing an investment in renewable DERs.

User-centric identity management systems are gaining momentum as concerns about Big Tech and Big Government rise. Many of these systems are framed as offering Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI). Yet, competing appropriation and the social embedding of SSI have resulted in diverging interpretations. These vague and value-laden interpretations can damage the public discourse and risk misrepresenting values and affordances that technology offers to users. To unpack the various social and technical understandings of SSI, we adopt an 'interpretive flexibility' lens. Based on a qualitative inductive interview study, we find that SSI's interpretation is strongly mediated by surrounding institutional properties. Our study helps to better navigate these different perceptions and highlights the need for a multidimensional framework that can improve the understanding of complex socio-technical systems for digital government practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers.

Bitcoin and Ethereum are frequently promoted as decentralized, but developers and academics question their actual decentralization. This motivates further experiments with public permissionless blockchains to achieve decentralization along technical, economic, and political lines. The distribution of tokenized voting rights aims for political decentralization. Tokenized voting rights achieved notoriety within the nascent field of decentralized finance (DeFi) in 2020. As an alternative to centralized crypto-asset exchanges and lending platforms (owned by companies like Coinbase and Celsius), DeFi developers typically create non-custodial projects that are not majority-owned or managed by legal entities. Holders of tokenized voting rights can instead govern DeFi projects. To scrutinize DeFi's distributed governance strategies, we conducted a multiple-case study of non-custodial, Ethereum-based DeFi projects: Uniswap, Maker, SushiSwap, Yearn Finance, and UMA. Our findings are novel and surprising: quantitative evaluations of DeFi's distributed governance strategies reveal a failure to achieve political decentralization.

Energy performance certificates (EPC) aim to provide transparency about building energy performance (BEP) and benchmark buildings. Despite having qualified auditors examining buildings through on-site visits, BEP accuracy in EPCs is frequently criticized. Qualified auditors are often bound to engineering-based energy quantification methods. However, recent studies have revealed data-driven methods to be more accurate regarding benchmarking. Unlike engineering methods, data-driven methods can learn from data that non-experts might collect. This raises the question of whether data-driven methods allow for simplified data collection while still achieving the same accuracy as prescribed engineering-based methods. This study presents a method for selecting building variables, which even occupants can reliably collect and which at the same time contribute most to a data-driven method's predictive power. The method is tested and validated in a case study on a real-world data set containing 25,000 German single-family houses. Having all data collected by non-experts, results show that the data-driven method achieves about 35% higher accuracy than the currently used engineering method by qualified auditors. Our study proposes a stepwise method to design data-driven EPCs, outlines design recommendations, and derives policy implications.

Cross-organizational collaboration and the exchange of process data are indispensable for many processes in federally organized governments. Conventional IT solutions, such as cross-organizational workflow management systems, address these requirements through centralized process management and architectures. However, such centralization is difficult and often undesirable in federal contexts. One alternative solution that emphasizes decentralized process management and a decentralized architecture is the blockchain solution of Germany's Federal Office for Migration and Refugees. Here, we investigate the architecture of this solution and examine how it addresses the requirements of federal contexts. We find that the solution's architecture resembles an improvement and cross-organizational adaption of an old architectural paradigm, the enterprise service bus.

Digital technologies are changing our society in many ways. In addition to significant increases in productivity and new forms of value creation, the rapid digital change also brings with it a multitude of political and social challenges. While the digitization of the public sector in Germany is still facing challenges, other countries are already further. For example, Estonia has already largely digitized its administration. The federal government would also like to advance Germany with a targeted digitization strategy and strengthen public administration through the use of digital technologies. One of the focus technologies in this context is blockchain. Blockchain is a decentralized data structure, in which data in cryptographically linked blocks can be stored invariably and traceably. The essential concept of blockchain technology is to manage the data to be stored through a subscriber network instead of a central instance. In addition, new blockchain technologies make it possible to automate parts of the cross-agency process management. Due to its properties, blockchain technology offers a good opportunity for coordination in federal structures, as required by the German asylum process. In addition to one body primarily responsible, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, other authorities at both federal and state level are involved in the asylum process. For example, initial reception centers and immigration authorities are subordinate to the respective federal states or part of the local government. This results in a large number of process variants, heterogeneous IT infrastructures and an incomplete digital exchange of information. A cross-agency data source already exists in the form of the Central Register of Foreigners (AZR). The AZR contains a large amount of data that may be recorded and stored by the authorized authorities in accordance with applicable law (especially AZRG). In addition, there is a need for IT-based support for cross-agency communication and cooperation. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees has now evaluated to what extent blockchain can contribute to overcoming these challenges and promote the establishment of digital identities in the asylum context as well as cross-agency communication and cooperation. A proof-of-concept project that the Federal Office carried out in the first half of 2018 serves as an essential reference point. The project began with the selection of the use case ("simplified asylum process") and a pre-evaluation of the suitability of the blockchain technology. After a positive pre-evaluation, a suitable system was developed by a mixed team from the Federal Office, the Fraunhofer FIT Business Informatics project group and a technology partner. The project was then evaluated according to a blockchain-specific evaluation framework. In addition to technical and professional aspects, the focus here was in particular on issues relating to data protection law. The proof-of-concept project has shown that the use of blockchain technology could support cross-agency communication and cooperation in the asylum process. In addition, blockchain could lay an important foundation for the establishment of digital identities and make the process flow of an asylum seeker traceable on the basis of such an identity. It is true that it has not yet been possible to fully implement all applicable data protection regulations in the developed proof-of-concept. However, the knowledge gained in the course of the project forms a promising basis for the development of a data protection-compliant blockchain-based solution for the asylum process. In addition, due to the federal structure taken into account, the developed concept could also be scaled beyond Germany's borders. A blockchain-based, transnational management of asylum processes could thus become a joint project of the European member states to strengthen cooperation while preserving federal structures. Blockchain technology could thus be the beginning of digital federalism in Europe (also in the asylum area).

Bitcoin and Ethereum are frequently promoted as decentralized, but developers and academics question their actual decentralization. This motivates further experiments with public permissionless blockchains to achieve decentralization along technical, economic, and political lines. The distribution of tokenized voting rights aims for political decentralization. Tokenized voting rights achieved notoriety within the nascent field of decentralized finance (DeFi) in 2020. As an alternative to centralized crypto-asset exchanges and lending platforms (owned by companies like Coinbase and Celsius), DeFi developers typically create non-custodial projects that are not majority-owned or managed by legal entities. Holders of tokenized voting rights can instead govern DeFi projects. To scrutinize DeFi's distributed governance strategies, we conducted a multiple-case study of non-custodial, Ethereum-based DeFi projects: Uniswap, Maker, SushiSwap, Yearn Finance, and UMA. Our findings are novel and surprising: quantitative evaluations of DeFi's distributed governance strategies reveal a failure to achieve political decentralization.