Towards Holistic Enterprise Modelling: Value Creation Concept in

Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM)

Victoria Klyukina

Department of Data and System Science, Stockholm University, Borgarfjordsgatan 12, 164 55 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden

Keywords: Enterprise Modelling, Fractal Enterprise Modelling, FEM, Holistic Modelling, Value Chain, Value Creation.

Abstract: Some researchers argue that traditional applications of enterprise modelling (EM) may provide limited value

when performing holistic analysis due to disjoint modelling domains that comprise organizations. Fractal

Enterprise Modelling (FEM) is a promising EM approach addressing this issue. FEM uses a modelling technic

that articulates an organisational fractal structure of an enterprise, and has been used for representing different

practical challenges in organisations. This paper is a part of an ongoing research where FEM is used for a

holistic analysis of organizational change associated with a strategy implementation in an organization.

Particularly, the paper discusses the application of a previously emerged modelling pattern that was useful for

supporting operational decision making. In this paper, it is argued that the same pattern is also useful for

representation of a value chain concept that allows to connect a high organisational level to the elements of a

lower operational level. The results imply that the usage of this pattern might be beneficial to promote

systematic and holistic modelling for business analysis using FEM.

1 INTRODUCTION

Enterprise Models (EM) are frameworks for

organising and classifying the principle factors

relevant to the purpose (Fettke, 2009) e.g. describing

and understanding how an enterprise works, and for

process improvement, etc. (Albertsen et al., 2010;

Bernhard & Recker, 2012; Blanc-Serrier et al., 2018;

Davies et al., 2004; Krogstie, 2015; Land et al., 2009;

Leonard & McAdam, 2002; Loucopoulos et al., 2015;

Parikh & Joshi, 2005; Weick, 1989). However, some

researchers argue that due to disjoint modelling

domains comprising organizations, the traditional

application of EM provides limited value (Krogstie,

2015; Olhager et al., 2001; Stirna & Persson, 2007).

Fractal Enterprise Modelling (FEM) (Bider et al.,

2017) is a technic that articulates organisational

fractal structure proposed by (Hoverstadt, 2013) and

that may be a promising solution for joining different

domains. The fractal organisational structure sets

down a well-tested systematic approach for building

a enterprise model of an organisation using the

recurring patterns at the progressively smaller scale

and of any degree of complexity.

FEM consists of the three types of elements

representing processes, assets and relationships

between them. These elements build two main types

of artefacts (or fractals): Process-Asset and Asset-

Process. Using these fractals in a reccuring manner

allows to build a directed graph. There is already

published a number of works about the main

principles of building FEM, see for example (Bider

et.al, 2017; Bider et al, 2018; Bider et al. 2019) or

visit a website (www.fractalmodel.org.). Initially,

FEM was developed with the ambition to address a

challenge of identifying existing processes in an

organisation, in-cluding hidden (Bider, Perjons,

2018). However, it was also tested in the case studies

for suitability in a variety of business tasks (Bider,

2020; Bider et al., 2017; Bider & Perjons, n.d.; Bider

& Perjons, 2019; Klyukina et al., 2021) with

promising results. For example, when FEM was used

in operational decision making, useful process

modelling pattern was identified. Particularly, the

acquire-asset-stock pattern was used for breaking

down generic processes into smaller activities to

obtain more details. Although this pattern is similar

to process modelling, there are some distinctive

differences, see (Klyukina et al., 2022). Another

example of using FEM is for identification of so

called “value capture processes” that tackles multiple

domains such as resource management and building

of competitive advantage; this was enabled by the

Klyukina, V.

Towards Holistic Enterprise Modelling: Value Creation Concept in Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM).

DOI: 10.5220/0011075500003179

In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2022) - Volume 2, pages 535-542

ISBN: 978-989-758-569-2; ISSN: 2184-4992

535

analysis of the recurring patterns of asset-process and

process-asset archetypes (see (Klyukina, 2021)).

Hence, the idea of using the same enterprise

modelling technique for complex business analysis

when several domains intersect, seems worthy to

investigate further.

The presented paper is a contentious research

dedicated to describing how different modelling

patterns in FEM may represent multiple business

domains, e.g. acquire-asset-stock relationship has

reinforced its usage as a value chain model of [24] in

the case of change analysis. Thus, the purpose of this

paper is to describe the extended role of acquire-

asset-stock pattern in FEM analysis and demonstrate

it on the real case exampple.

2 RESEARCH APPROACH

The presented paper is a part of a broader research

related to the FEM development in both perspectives:

as a conceptual modelling and as a toolkit. Thus, the

research approach belongs to Design Science (DS)

paradigm and is concerned with building artefact

(Hevner et al., 2004) or finding a solution (Bider et

al., 2013). The presented research falls into the

demonstration phase in definition of (Peffers et al.,

2007). The preceded case studies including FEM

application for operational decision making

(Klyukina et al., 2021) resulted in eliciting a practical

issue. This issue is associated with the limited

possibility to use one enterprise modelling technique

for holistic business analysis. The effort to address

this challenge represents a move towards the solution.

Fernandez argues that the synergy between rigor

and relevance within DS is possible on the basis of a

case analysis that provides a good framework for

rigorous and relevant research of emerging

phenomena (Fernandez et al., 2002). In the presented

research, the relevance part is addressed through

contextual, practical application of FEM where a

holistic analysis of an organisational change is

required. Since to find out the missing knowledge and

fil the gap in a new area of design it is useful to

attempt carrying out the design using existing

knowledge (Vaishnavi & Kuechler, 2008), the rigor

part is addressed by explaining how the emerged

solutions are related to an accepted theoretical

framework. Particularly, Porter’s value chain

framework (Porter, 1998b). This concept has been

chosen since it is a well-excepted and widely used

existing framework.

To reach the aim of the study, the suitable context

for testing FEM as a holistic modelling tool was

identified as the case of organisational change. The

organisational change is always a complex matter

affecting few or several business domains (depending

on the scope and type). The project started in October

2021. The data is being collected through the semi-

structured interviews with the manager of the

investigated department as well as the study of

documents. The overall purpose of the modelling

project is to assist top management with change

analysis for strategy implementation. The whole work

was designed by specifying certain purposes and

corresponding steps. This paper describes results only

on the first step of the entire project with the purposes:

- to create FEM models of the organisation at a high

strategic level to illustrate the generic process of

the value proposition in the context of the overall

goal and the chosen strategy;

- to show the position of the change in the business

context by decomposing the main value

proposition process into sequential value creating

processes and;

- to depict how the change elements contributes

into the value creation through interconnections to

the other elements at a high level of the system

creating the possibility for further decomposition.

The knowledge acquired in the project, either

positive or negative, contributes into FEM

development since it provides the information on the

future research directions. The result would be

considered as a success if the modelling experience

delivers on at least one of the following outcomes:

- building a FEM model at a high level capturing

organisational value proposition, goal and

strategy;

- building a valid FEM model of a generic value

creation showing the position of the change

elements and interconnections to other elements at

a high level with the possibility to further

decompose the processes. In the presented

outcome, ‘valid’ is defined as depicting organisa-

tional value creation context corresponding to

Value Chain concept of (Porter, 1998b).

3 VALUE CREATION CONCEPT

IN FEM

Porter’s Value Chain is an iconic model that depicts

general organisational processes (Fig. 1). The model

comprises five main processes (bottom line)

representing the chain of processes that creates and

accumulate value to the end product; and four support

processes (horizontal lines) that represent the internal

ICEIS 2022 - 24th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

536

Figure 1: Porter's Value Chain model (Grant, 2013).

activities needed for main processes to run smoothly.

However, Porter’s model is criticised for the lack of

dynamics (Grant, 2016). In FEM Porter’s Value

Chain concept can be realised using acquire-asset-

stock pattern (or process decomposition) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 is an illustrative example that shows the

decomposition of the main value process or value

proposition of the company ‘Production and selling

of goods’. The five processes that this value

proposition consists of represent the value chain

corresponding to Porter’s generic model. To

decompose the main process, the acquire-asset-stock

pattern is used in the way as described in (Klyukina

et al., 2022) to show how the goods are transformed

from the raw material to the sold and delivered

followed by offers for services. This pattern usage is

similar to process modelling where more details can

be added (in this example all unnecessary details are

omitted to keep it simple). The process-asset

archetype is used to denote the instrumental assets

needed to perform value creating processes. In Fig. 3,

these are shown in relation to the two processes in the

value chain: ‘Inbound logistics’ and ‘Marketing and

Sale’. For instance, Infra-structure is represented by

different ‘Corporate services’ such as IT, financial,

legal, etc., or H&R is represented by the ‘Human

resources’ asset with the notation ‘Work-force’, etc.

These assets represent the contribution of the support

processes into the main value creating processes

corresponding to Porter’s HR Management,

Procurement, R&D/Development and Infrastructure.

The need for these assets justifies the existence and

the design of the support processes. Note, when Value

Chain is applied to FEM, the support to main

activities is represented not by the activities

themselves but by the assets that are required to run

the main processes. In other words, the sup-port

activities are represented by the processes needed to

tune the ‘instrumental’ as-sets. Such representation

Figure 2: Value Chain concept in FEM (hypothetical example).

Towards Holistic Enterprise Modelling: Value Creation Concept in Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM)

537

addresses the dynamics issue since change in business

entails changes in assets that affect internal/external

transactions, use of skills and resources that may have

a repercussion effect on finances if not adjusted

(Lecocq et al., 2006). Thus, this way of value chain

representation contributes not only to identification of

what support activities must be in place but also to

what and how they should be adjusted in relation to

change. This identification is necessary for a holistic

analysis. For example, as it is shown in Fig. 2, to hire

a certain type of workers the “Career path and

rewards polices” plays an important role as an

attraction of the desired people in the “Hiring”

process. Other links can be further investigated by

repetition of the process-asset/asset-process

archetypes or process decomposition into smaller

activities. Being able to model such interconnection

implies on the high potential usefulness of FEM to

assist change analysis and strategy implementation.

To test FEM for a holistic analysis using value

chain concept as a starting point the real case example

has been used.

4 BUSINESS CASE

The following description of the business case

presents only partial information relevant to the

present stage of the study. Future planned papers will

reveal more details on the practical situation and the

complete results of using FEM for strategy

implementation and change management.

The organisation where FEM is applied to assist

analysis of an organisational change operates in the

field of Information Communication Technologies

(ICT). The global corporation produces and sells test

measurement equipment. However, for a number of

years, the business has been challenged by the rapidly

changing environment and tough competition. As a

consequence, the company’s position as a

technological leader in the field has been

compromised. To reach the goal and retain the status

of being a technological leader, the top management

has decided to undergo organisational change. The

change concerns structural adjustments to its R&D

function that is expected to produce the desired

outcomes. Consequently, a new WG1-Technology

department for development of a long-term, holistic

product strategy has been established. The

organisational structure is presented in Fig. 3.

Denoted in red (Fig. 3) in the hierarchical tree the

investigated department is presented, namely, WG1 –

Technology. This department is established to

implement the declared strategy and win back the

leading strategic position. Due to historical reason,

WG1-Technology department is structurally

positioned under WG1 group which is part of a Sales

but, actually, is a self-standing department that

reports directly to the M-Group office. It works

closely with Sales and five Business Units to

coordinate their activities. This new department is

where the data for the case was collected. The new

role is concerned with a thorough environmental

analysis that aim to support a proactive product

strategy development, as well as coordination of

Figure 3: Business organisation (case material).

ICEIS 2022 - 24th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

538

information flow between Sales and R&Ds different

Business Units. The practical challenge, though, for

the management in reaching the desired goal is to be

able to implement and adjust the direction of the

chosen strategy when needed.

To assist management in this task the modelling

project has been initiated on the basis of the mutual

benefits. FEM is deployed to fulfil the objectives with

the focus on R&D processes.

5 MODELLING RESULTS AND

ANALYSIS

The first step was to create FEM models at a high

level of operation to illustrate the generic process of

the value creation in the context of the overall goal

and the chosen strategy, see Fig. 4.

The model in Fig. 4 illustrates the highest level of

organisational operation. The asset on the right

“Strong reputation associated with the superior

innovative capability” and a certain growth “Profit

(%)” represent the desired organisational strategic

position. Namely, its prime objective is to regain a

leadership in innovation in the field of measurement

equipment supply; and, subsequently, to increase the

profit by being up-front with the customers in the

market. The standard process-asset archetype is used

to represent this generic, high level goal modelling.

Comparing to the goal modelling, this is a starting

point to breaking down the processes into more

detailed components that actually exist in the

organisation. The goal modelling is focused only on

breaking down the goals with relatively complicated

observation of interconnections and actual activities

needed to reach the goal. Whereas, FEM elements can

be decomposed to a detailed level in a relatively

simple manner without losing the track of the origin.

The second sub-purpose of modelling to create

FEM showing the position of the change in the

business context by decomposing the main value

proposition process into sequential value creating

processes and to depict the interconnections of the

elements of change relative to its position at a high

level of the system was completed by building of the

model shown in Fig. 5. Note, that due to the

limitations only the fragment of model is shown. The

model in Fig. 5 presents the main value creating

process’s decomposition and maps the position of the

support R&D activities and their contribution to the

one of the main value creation ‘Sale process’ in a

given context. ‘Production and sell of measurement

equipment’. The R&D process is highlighted by the

red-coloured boarder as well as the asset it produces

that is needed for value creation in the ‘Sales

process’. The graph also shows that the creation of the

asset ‘New models and modifications’ requires the

coordination of the activities and information flow

between working groups for innovation, sales and

production. These is shown by the links between

processes. These elements represent the old way of

working towards the goal of having a superior

innovative capability.

The change elements are shown by the solid red

colour: the process ‘Product strategy development’

which role is to acquire and maintain the ‘Long-term

holistic product strategy’, and the workforce

dedicated to the task represented by the asset “WG1-

Techology advisory team’. These elements were

created to reinforce the reputation and goal

achievement by better coordination of the involved

teams and information exchange. This is done

through introduction of a new element necessary for

the value creation, the long-term product strategy.

Figure 4: Highest level organisational value proposition model (case material).

Towards Holistic Enterprise Modelling: Value Creation Concept in Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM)

539

Figure 5: Decomposition of the main process into value chain (fragment from the case material).

This contribution is captured in Fig. 5 by the link

with notation EXT showing that the holistic strategy

for product development works as overarching

instruction for all involved parties.

This decomposition represents the next level of

the operational hierarchy where acquire-asset-stock

modelling pattern is used. This pattern is similar to

the process modelling technique of transformation

input into output. Its usage and usefulness are already

described in using FEM in operational-decision

making (Klyukina et al., 2021).

Note that showing the difference in the work

coordination before and after the change as well as

how lower-level elements may affect the goal

achievement is a matter of the future work. Namely,

the next step would be to decompose the process-es

in question (e.g., business development process in the

case) into sub-processes, the subprocesses into

activities and so on revealing the interconnectivity

aspects. However, this paper is concerned merely

with the outlining the way of using FEM for a holistic

modelling and describing how the acquire-asset-stock

pattern is used to enable it.

ICEIS 2022 - 24th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

540

6 DISCUSSION, FUTURE

RESEARCH AND

LIMITATIONS

The aim of the study is to explain the role of the

acquire-asset-stock pattern in FEM for a holistic

modelling. The result indicates that the acquire-asset-

stock pattern might be useful to initiate a holistic

modelling by representing a value chain process

including main and support.

In the on-going case study where FEM is used for

organisational change analysis and strategy

implementation, the acquire-asset-stock pattern

appears to be useful for representation of the

organisational value chain defining the main and the

support processes. This implies on the possibility to

connect the operational level of the organisation to its

generic value chain or strategic level applying only

FEM technique. In fact, in the on-going study, the

acquire-asset-stock pattern has been applied to

represent the value chain as an initial point of the case

analysis. The following scaling down and

decomposition of the support processes will introduce

greater details to the processes showing vertical and

horizontal interconnections between different do-

mains. Then, the second layer of sub-process

decomposition may take place, and so on. These

interconnections will allow to analyse multiple

aspects such as coordination, efficiency, capability

building, resource management, human and cultural

aspects, etc. Such structure seems being a promising

way to use FEM for a holistic analysis of the

organisational change and strategy implementation.

Besides, intro-duction of value chain pattern at the

generic level of FEM enables the distinction between

the processes belonging to the value creation or value

capture activities. This is important for the holistic

analysis of the overall goal achievement since

creating value without capturing it is fatal for the

organisation’s survival (Grant, 2016). More

discussion on the topic will follow after completing

the on-going case study. Also, more about how FEM

may assist to identify value capture processes in

(Klyukina, 2021).

The presented research was limited to analysis of

the one case example. In the future it is desirable to

continue testing the proposed way of holistic

modelling using FEM in the real settings. By

identifying the configuration of the assets throughout

the organisation’s activities it might be also feasible

to analyse the system from the multiple perspectives

and identify sources of internal competitive

advantage (innovation) within new approach of doing

business such as redesigned processes or novel

organisational design.

7 CONCLUSIONS

The presented paper is a part of the ongoing research

on Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM) development. It

discusses the role of the acquire-asset-stock pattern in

the value creating context to enable holistic analysis

of the organisational change in the real settings using

FEM.

The results based on the objectives of the

presented paper are considered as being successful.

The first outcome has been achieved by building

FEM model (Fig. 4) that illustrates the generic

process of the value proposition in the context of the

overall goal and chosen strategy. The second outcome

is reached by building FEM model (Fig. 5) that

illustrating the decomposition of the main value

proposition process into the sequential value creating

processes representing value chain. Fig. 5 also depicts

the position of the change (support R&D process) and

the interconnections to other elements in value

creation. The impact this support process has on the

strategic goal achievement is depicted through the

asset it manages that is necessary for running a value

creating sale process. Further decomposition is

needed to enable the analyses of alignment of this

support process with the chosen strategy. But this is

the objective of future work. The presented results

imply on that the usage of this pattern might be

beneficial to promote a systematic and holistic

modelling for business analysis using FEM.

REFERENCES

Albertsen, T., Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U., & Tarasov, V.

(2010). The Practice of Competence Modelling. In P.

van Bommel, S. Hoppenbrouwers, S. Overbeek, E.

Proper, & J. Barjis (Eds.), The Practice of Enterprise

Modeling (pp. 106–120). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Aysolmaz, B., Yaldiz, A., & Reijers, H. (2016). A Process

Variant Modeling Method Compari-son: Experience

Report. In R. Schmidt, W. Guédria, I. Bider, & S.

Guerreiro (Eds.), Enterprise, Business-Process and

Information Systems Modeling (pp. 285–300). Springer

International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

3-319-39429-9_18

Bernhard, E., & Recker, J. (2012). Preliminary Insights

from a Multiple Case Study on Process Modelling

Impact. 11.

Bider, I. (2020). Structural Coupling, Strategy and Fractal

Enterprise Modeling. In F. Dalpiaz, J. Zdravkovic, & P.

Towards Holistic Enterprise Modelling: Value Creation Concept in Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM)

541

Loucopoulos (Eds.), Research Challenges in

Information Science (Vol. 385, pp. 95–111). Springer

International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

3-030-50316-1_6

Bider, I., Johannesson, P., & Perjons, E. (2013). Using

Empirical Knowledge and Studies in the Frame of

Design Science Research. In J. vom Brocke, R.

Hekkala, S. Ram, & M. Ros-si (Eds.), Design Science

at the Intersection of Physical and Virtual Design (Vol.

7939, pp. 463–470). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38827-9_38

Bider, I., & Perjons, E. (n.d.). Using Fractal Enterprise

Model to Assist Complexity Management. CEUR

2018, pp233-238.

Bider, I., Perjons, E., Elias, M., & Johannesson, P. (2017).

A fractal enterprise model and its application for

business development. Software & Systems Modeling,

16(3), 663–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-016-

0554-9

Bider Ilia, Perjons Erik, I. (2019). Value-Based

Organisational Desgn. 8.

Blanc-Serrier, S., Ducq, Y., & Vallespir, B. (2018).

Organisational interoperability characterisa-tion and

evaluation using enterprise modelling and graph theory.

Computers in Indus-try, 101, 67–80.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.04.012

Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., & Gallo, S. (2004).

Conceptual Modelling – What and Why in Current

Practice. In P. Atzeni, W. Chu, H. Lu, S. Zhou, & T.-

W. Ling (Eds.), Conceptual Modeling – ER 2004 (Vol.

3288, pp. 30–42). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30464-7_4

Fernandez, W. D., Lehmann, H., & Underwood, A. (2002).

Rigor and Relevance in Studies of IS Innovation: A

Grounded Theory Methodology Approach. Conference

on Information Systems (ECIS).

http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2002

Fettke, P. (2009). How Conceptual Modeling Is Used.

Communications of the Association for Information

Systems, 25. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02543

Grant, R. M. (2016). Contemporary strategy analysis: Text

and cases (Ninth Edition). Wiley.

Hevner, March, Park, & Ram. (2004). Design Science in

Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1),

75. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625

Hoverstadt, P. (2013). The fractal organization: Creating

sustainable organizations with the viable system model.

Wiley. http://rbdigital.oneclickdigital.com

Klyukina, V. (2021). Detecting Value Capture Processes

Using Fractal Enterprise Model (FEM). In E. Serral, J.

Stirna, J. Ralyté, & J. Grabis (Eds.), The Practice of

Enterprise Model-ing (Vol. 432, pp. 80–89). Springer

International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

3-030-91279-6_6

Klyukina, V., Bider, I., & Perjons, E. (2022, Forthcoming).

Patterns for Using Fractal Enterprise Modelling in

Operational Decision-Making. Revised Selected

Papers. ICEIS.

Klyukina, V., Bider, I., & Perjons, E. (2021). Does Fractal

Enterprise Model Fit Operational Decision Making?:

Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on

Enterprise Information Systems, 613–624.

https://doi.org/10.5220/0010407306130624

Krogstie, J. (2015, November 10). Combining Top-down

and Bottom-up Modelling for Agile Enterprises.

Land, M., Zwitzer, H., Ensink, P., & Lebel, Q. (2009).

Towards a fast enterprise ontology based method for

post merger integration. Proceedings of the 2009 ACM

Symposium on Ap-plied Computing - SAC ’09, 245.

https://doi.org/10.1145/1529282.1529336

Lecocq, X., Demil, B., & Warnier, V. (2006). Le business

model, un outil d’analyse strategique. 96–109.

Leonard, D., & McAdam, R. (2002). The role of the

business excellence model in operational and strategic

decision making. Management Decision, 40(1), 17–25.

https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740210413325

Loucopoulos, P., Stratigaki, C., Danesh, M. H., Bravos, G.,

Anagnostopoulos, D., & Dimi-trakopoulos, G. (2015).

Enterprise Capability Modeling: Concepts, Method,

and Ap-plication. 2015 International Conference on

Enterprise Systems (ES), 66–77.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ES.2015.14

Olhager, J., Rudberg, M., & Wikner, J. (2001). Long-term

capacity management: Linking the perspectives from

manufacturing strategy and sales and operations

planning. Interna-tional Journal of Production

Economics, 69(2), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/

S0925-5273(99)00098-5

Parikh, M. A., & Joshi, K. (2005). Purchasing process

transformation: Restructuring for small purchases.

International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 25(11), 1042–1061. https://doi.org/

10.1108/01443570510626880

Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., &

Chatterjee, S. (2007). A Design Science Research

Methodology for Information Systems Research.

Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3),

45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302

Porter, M. E. (1998b). The Competitive Advantage:

Creating and Sustaining Superior Perfor-mance. NY:

Free Press.

Reed, S. K. (2016). The Structure of Ill-Structured (and

Well-Structured) Problems Revisited. Educational

Psychology Review, 28(4), 691–716.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9343-1

Stirna, J., & Persson, A. (2007). Http://hj.diva-

portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A37295&ds

wid=5179. http://hj.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?

pid=diva2%3A37295&dswid=5179

Vaishnavi, V., & Kuechler, W. (2008). Design science

research methods and patterns: Innovating information

and communication technology. Auerbach

Publications.

Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory Construction as Disciplined

Imagination. The Academy of Manage-ment Review,

14(4), 516. https://doi.org/10.2307/258556

ICEIS 2022 - 24th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

542