The number of organisations that operate multiple business models continues to increase. However, operating multiple business models can be complex, as they often need to be harmonised within a broader portfolio due to their interdependencies. This complexity is exac-erbated by the increasing role of digital technology and data - enabling new opportunities but also coming with related paradoxes. This paper examines the growing body of literature on business model portfolios revealing that they are evolving into a strategic tool for value creation and business performance. While there are concomitant value opportunities arising from com-plementarities and synergies, there are also paradoxes emerging from tensions that need to be considered. Employing a developmental literature review, we present a synthesis of recent empirical case studies to gain insight into the management of business model portfolios. Firstly, we identify different strategic intents: diversifying, sensing, and complementing. Secondly, we distil different themes for value opportunities and paradoxes and categorise them according to a business model framework. Thirdly, we identify and discuss the role of digital technologies and data for business model portfolios. Overall, we contribute to an emerging stream of studies on multiple business models in relation to strategy, innovation and technology. By adopting a ho-listic perspective on the management of business model portfolios, we explore strategic intent, value opportunities and paradoxes, and discuss how portfolios can play a role in strategic man-agement and planning.

‘Business Process Standardization’ (BPS) is a practice intended to achieve consistency across underlying organizational processes, in support of service-delivery excellence and optimization of costs and benefits. Given the growing importance of BPS, there is need in both research and practice for clearer conceptual understanding of the notion. Following a systematic literature review approach, prior work on Business Process Standardization is synthesized and extended using tool-supported qualitative data analysis techniques, to derive an evidence-based, holistic conceptualization of BPS. We distil seven stages of BPS execution, propose a refined definition for BPS, and identify measures that gauge the several conceptual themes of BPS. The findings provide solid theoretical foundations, and practicable guidelines for future BPS researchers and practitioners.

The Journal of Strategic Information Systems (JSIS) was first published December 1991 by Robert (Bob) D. Galliers, its Founding Editor-in-Chief (EiC). Early on Bob invited me to join the JSIS International Editorial Board(1) (the Board then being more operational, with members serving as quasi-AEs, an arrangement we've reinstituted more recently). I became Pacific Asia Region Editor in 2003, with JSIS shifting from region editors to Senior Editors in 2007, in which role I served the journal through the end of 2018. Mid-2018 Bob and Sirkka (Sirkka Jarvenpaa joined as co-EiC in 2000) jointly decided it was time; and announced they would both step down from their co-EiC roles at the end of that year. In September 2018, I was endorsed by Bob and Sirkka, the Senior Editors and Elsevier, to succeed Bob and Sirkka and assume the role of Editor-in-Chief of JSIS commencing 1 January 2019. I served as Editor-in-Chief through 1 July 2021 after which Yolande Chan and I served as co-Editors-in-Chief. Now the end of 2022, I am stepping down from operational involvement with the journal. In this my final editorial I focus on my time as EiC, also reflecting on my almost 3 decades with the journal. I much appreciate being invited to write these brief ruminations and am honoured to be included amongst the journal's Emeritus, along with the esteemed Robert Galliers and Sirkka Jarvenpaa.

The Business Correspondent (BC) model is an IT-enabled business process outsourcing initiative to provide financial services to the unbanked. It is a complex banking system involving multiple actors, system elements and settings, intended to address financial exclusion. Given the BC-Model’s potentially significant role in economic sustainability, it is important to evaluate its success. Efforts to measure the success of the BC-Model have been limited to date; this paper therefore presents a conceptual framework of BC-Model-Success consisting of six dimensions- economic, strategic, technological, customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and social, resulting from a three-phase study design. The relevance of the framework was empirically validated across four implementations of the BC-Model. The resulting framework provides strong theoretical foundations for understanding what BC model success is, for assisting practitioners with evaluating the success of the BC-Model and with identifying possible improvements, and for facilitating future research on the BC-Model.

Our respectful old friend Professor Ting-Peng Liang (in short, TP) whom we loved suddenly passed away on May 20, 2021. But we cannot forget his smile and passion, and his inerasable footprints in PACIS, PAJAIS, and AIS Community. He was the founder of PACIS, founding editor-in-chief of PAJAIS, and past president of AIS to list just a few. He was the pioneer who received the first AIS Fellow and the first LEO Award from Asia Pacific. That is why the leaders of the information systems field organized the first ever special tribute session in PACIS 2021 in memory of TP (https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2021/253/)

PurposeBusiness process modelling (BPMo) projects are core to digital transformation projects as they provide the conceptual foundation to the orchestration of technologies along a process. Yet, success factors of BPMo projects have received little research attention to date. This study empirically validates a BPMo project success model, pointing to normative practice guidelines and important future research.Design/methodology/approachThis research reports on the quantitative re-specification and validation of a business process modelling success model, employing survey responses from 261 process modellers worldwide.FindingsThe study distilled and validated a final set of success antecedents: Top Management Support, Project Management Capabilities, Stakeholder Input, Modeller Expertise and Modelling Tool Usage; and clearly evidences their relationships with each other and with two moderating variables – Importance and Complexity. The paper offers a nuanced explanation of the indirect role of top management support in building stakeholder involvement and explains how complex projects that are perceived as important being more likely to attract high levels of necessary stakeholder involvement. The authors conclude that top management needs to create an environment of co-ordinated excellence which spans both technical skills and resources, and a high level of committed engagement between stakeholders and technicians in order for BPMo projects to succeed.Originality/valueThis study is the first to operationalize and quantitatively test antecedents of BPMo project success and their interactions, presenting novel insights into how the success factors interact. Awareness of the more influential antecedents of successful process modelling projects offers valuable guidance for the planning, management and conduct of BPMo projects.

Business Process Standardization (BPS) is a strategy for improved efficiency and effectiveness of business processes. However, BPS approaches are known to vary much in practice, can consume inordinate time and resources, and are ill-understood. This study applies an exploratory analysis of BPS literature to identify alternative BPS strategies. The analysis identified three key decision-points when strategizing: (i) Approach to standardization (Bottom-up or Top-down), (ii) Choice of Master Process (Internal Exemplar, Internal Best-of-Breed, or External Exemplar), and (iii) Optimization of the Master Process (Yes or No). These alternative choices, in combination, yield 12 BPS strategies, which are described herein and instantiated by mapping 21 published BPS cases against the 12 strategy types. The resulting typology of BPS strategies can serve as a useful tool for researchers investigating BPS and may provide insight for practitioners when considering an appropriate BPS strategy, or in better understanding their existing implicit or explicit strategy.

The Journal of Strategic Information Systems (JSIS) was first published in December 1991 by Robert D. (Bob) Galliers, its founding Editor-in-Chief (EiC), following an invitation to establish the journal by Butterworth Heinemann in 1989. Bob invited Sirkka Jarvenpaa to join him as co Editor-in-Chief in 2000. In 2018, Bob and Sirkka jointly decided it was time, and after three and two decades at the helm respectively, announced they would both step down from their EiC roles at the end of that year. Bob and Sirkka, the Senior Editors and Elsevier endorsed Guy Gable to assume the role of Editor-in-Chief commencing January 2019. In this reflection, Guy interviews Bob Galliers on the 'changing of the guard'; the journal's past and future, and the topic of Strategic Information Systems more broadly. We believe the history of JSIS as reflected in Bob's ruminations is insightful for the Journal's readers and the IS community. From the discussion we learn how an academic journal was guided to success by focusing on the vision, the strategic choices and actions, the team composition and the ability to adapt and lead in a constantly changing environment, where the technology developments challenge organizational structures, markets and society. A set of well thought through strategic choices, initially made by Bob and later in collaboration with Sirkka and the rest of the editorial team, led the Journal to the top of the research field by gaining respect from scholars in the underlying research areas, i.e., IS management, Strategy and Organization Science.(1)

This viewpoint has two aligned aims: (i) to expound the value of a strategic research orientation for the Information Systems Discipline; and (ii) to facilitate such a strategic orientation by recognising the value of programmatic research, and promoting the publication of such work.

This article(1,2) has two aligned aims: (i) to espouse the value of a strategic research orientation for the Information Systems Discipline; and (ii) to facilitate such a strategic orientation by recognising the value of programmatic research and promoting the publication of such work. It commences from the viewpoint that Information Systems (IS) research benefits from being strategic at every level, from individual researcher, to research program, to research discipline and beyond. It particularly advocates for more coordinated programs of research emphasising real-world impact, while recognising that vibrant, individual-driven and small-team research within broad areas of promise, is expected to continue forming the core of the IS research ecosystem. Thus, the overarching aim is the amplification of strategic thinking in IS research - the further leveraging of an orientation natural to the JSIS community, with emphasis on research programs as a main strategic lever, and further considering how JSIS can be instrumental in this aim.

Extensive theory testing refers to the joint conduct of theory testing and extension in a single empirical study. One of the types of extensive theory testing is using case study approach. While quantitative approach to theory testing, such as survey method, focuses on corroborating or falsifying theory, extensive theory testing aims to both corroborate and extend theory at the same time. By employing extensive theory testing, researchers can simultaneously develop deeper understandings of an existing theory situated within a context and generate new insights based on the effort to test the existing theory. Thus, extensive theory testing offers a useful alternative, complementing quantitative approach to theory testing. Although case study has been used for theory testing, the rationale and procedures of extensive theory testing have not been adequately understood. In this paper, we clarify the rationale of extensive theory testing and propose a framework for the conduct of extensive theory testing.