Business process management

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com

Business process management

Exploring social capital within processes Nick Llewellyn and Colin Armistead

The Business School, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK Keywords Business process management, Service delivery, Service industry, Processes


225 Received March 1998 Revised July 1999 Accepted October 1999

Abstract This paper explores evidence of ``social capital'' within the service delivery process of a large telecommunications company. It considers the extent to which a specific business process exhibited structural, relational and cognitive features of social capital, which enabled social credits to be traded and status to be conferred across operational boundaries. Through a textual analysis of interview data, the research generates an understanding of how certain groups within business processes ± often utilising informal structures ± created, maintained and exchanged social credits. This framework of analysis is then applied to address the function of social capital within the process. Evidence is presented to suggests that credits shared across functional boundaries informed upon employees ability to deal with emergencies, recover services and to cope when things went wrong. The paper concludes by making a range of propositions that may enable managers to identify, build and maintain social capital within processes.

Introduction Business process management (BPM) emerged out of total quality management (Garvin, 1995) and business process re-engineering (Hammer and Champy, 1993). A business process is a series of inter-related activities that cross functional boundaries with individual inputs and outputs. Business processes are characterised as being operational or supporting. Operational processes are associated with the way organisations develop strategies, invent products and services, market and sell these, manage production and delivery of products or services, and bill customers. Support processes include the provision of HRM activities, information systems infrastructure, finance and asset management. Processes can be seen as having the structural characteristics of networks that facilitate the flow of information and the movement of people or materials. These networks exist inside or outside organisations. External networks constitute value chains as characterised by Porter (1985), while internal networks consist of a range of internal customers and suppliers as characterised by Schonberger (1990). One goal of business process management is to remove barriers between functional groups by creating a community of employees linked by membership of a process. Through the creation of ``social capital'' at the process level (Burt, 1992, p. 57), the flow of information and service across functional boundaries may become more effective (Armistead and Rowland, 1996). Researchers have tended to explore business processes from a managerial perspective, concentrating on the classification of business processes

International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11 No. 3, 2000, pp. 225-243. # MCB University Press, 0956-4233

IJSIM 11,3

226

(Armistead and Rowland, 1996), links with service productivity (Armistead et al., 1999) and knowledge management within processes (Speier et al., 1998). While some authors have addressed the flow of internal services across functional boundaries (Chaston, 1994; Reynoso and Moores, 1995), these authors have explored specific outcomes, e.g. internal service quality (Davis, 1991) or customer satisfaction (Gremler et al., 1994). Research has not tended to evaluate social behaviour within processes, across function domains, as it supports or inhibits the effective functioning of processes. In this paper, business processes are conceptualised as complex social communities. Through empirical research we identify pockets of social capital within a specific business process and introduce a theoretical model of ``social capital'' (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 251) that might further the understanding of social behaviour within processes. The aim of the paper is to explore whether business processes exhibit the structural, relational and cognitive characteristics of communities that generate and distribute collectively owned social capital. Social capital in service processes Social capital informs upon the value, or credits, obtained through membership of a network of relationships (Burt, 1992, p. 63) which may be formal or informal in nature (Robins, 1996). The theory of social capital predicts that through levels of engagement with a network of relationships individuals can gain access to resources unavailable to others (Bourdieu, 1986). Social capital addresses the working of the network and what can be gained through leveraging network ties and relationships. In line with this view, Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998, p. 243) define social capital as the ``. . . sum of the actual and potential resources embedded within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships''. Hence, social capital is an attribute of networks. Access to social capital clearly has benefits for individuals who gain access to improved support. Whether social capital benefits whole communities is more debatable and depends upon levels of integratation. When networks are closely integrated they share overarching goals. In these situations, social capital might establish strong cross-cutting relationships necessary for collective action (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). However, when networks become fragmented consisting of different groups with disparate agendas, pockets of social capital might potentially undermine collective action. Service processes are one type of network where individuals invest effort, interact with others and allocate resources to provide customer service. Processes can also be thought of as communities, made up of employees from across functional domains working towards some shared goal. Hence, complex service networks may rely on social capital to provide consistency of service whilst also providing a rationale for collective action. We argue service processes will benefit from some investment by front-line staff in the social capital of the whole process, providing members with ``collectively owned and generated capital'' (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 243) which can be exploited

when there are service delivery problems. Particular operational circumstances Business process may arise where employees need to ask colleagues for flexibility or favours in management order to maintain levels of customer service. These interactions and the levels of service they generate might be enhanced by social capital generated across functional boundaries. Hence, we present social capital as a framework for exploring network connections between different parts of service processes and 227 the levels of support transferred between them. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998, p. 251) provide a conceptual framework to explain social capital, defining three inter-related dimensions: structural, relational and cognitive. The structural dimension addresses network configuration and linkages, what Burt (1992, p. 59) refers to as ``whom you reach and how you reach them''. It captures the pattern of relationships that define a particular network and the way in which network structure emerges. Within service processes structural dimensions may inform upon the formal and informal linkages between colleagues in different parts of particular processes, where individuals have ``favored routes'' (Robins, 1996) across functions boundaries. It has been suggested that the structural dimension of social capital may strongly reflect patterns of social exchange (Homans, 1961), where connectivity shapes the potential resources an individual might leverage through the provision and exchange of favours. This reflects the assumption that networks tend to emerge when vested interests converge. The relational dimension of social capital accesses the extent to which networks are underpinned by interpersonal ties held between exchange actors. The literature suggests the primary importance of trust and friendship in the development of network ties (Granovetter, 1985, p. 487). Hence, while part of the incentive for membership of a particular network is economic, e.g. in terms of the costs and benefits associated with action, there might also be emotional bonds holding networks together. There is likely to be an interaction between the relational and structural dimensions, with prior friendship shaping the extent to which individuals are willing to enter into exchange relationships. In addition, the fact that colleagues who trade favours are likely to develop bonds of trust that in turn encourage investments in the social capital of the network (Blau, 1964, p. 89) might further highlight an interaction between relational and structural dimensions. Finally, cognitive dimensions inform upon shared `ìnterpretative schemes'' developed by groups and shared language used to articulate and embed ``shared representations, interpretations and systems of meaning among parties'' (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). Hence, while the relational dimension accesses the emotional bonds that hold networks together, the cognitive dimension captures the extent to which shared ways of thinking and interpreting events supports the generation of social capital. Within business processes, cognitive factors may inform upon shared rationales for action, i.e. customer focus. However, this might also serve to highlight possible differences between groups which might inhibit collective behaviour, as

IJSIM 11,3

228

research has indicated conflict between the language and interpretations of functional groups might inhibit the effectiveness of process action (Armistead and Rowland, 1996). In this paper, we argue the combined effects of the dimensions of social capital might be used to understand service actions in different parts of a process network. While social capital is clearly a broad construct, the following model may be used as a guide to locate pockets of social capital within service processes (Figure 1) that might give insights into social behaviour within processes. Further, we propose that evidence of social capital existing within processes would be beneficial to organisations, especially within service processes where there are complex service tasks and uncertainty about the level of demand and the time needed to complete a service event. These situations may exacerbate pressures on service staff, or prevent service failure or recovery when things go wrong. It is reasonable to expect that having social capital could help to deal with these operational circumstances across functional boundaries for the ultimate benefit of external customers. The research organisation Empirical research into social capital within processes was conducted in a large telecommunications company that had pursued a business process management approach since the late 1980s. The organisation identified seven core business processes: address customer needs and requirements, design and operate the network, sell to and service customers, provide service, repair and maintain service, operator service, bill customers and collect payment. Operational management and process improvements were influenced by total quality management approaches. ISO 9000 accreditation was common in many parts of the organisation. Quality and customer service programmes had

Figure 1. A model of social capital based upon Nahapiet and Ghoshal

touched a high proportion of employees. The organisation used the Business Business process Excellence Model as a self-assessment tool and had also entered for quality management awards at UK and European levels. The ownership of key business processes was expressed at various levels through the organisation. At business unit level managing directors were process owners. The business had reorganised to emphasise process 229 boundaries and give emphasis to customer-facing divisions using the terminology of client businesses and supply divisions. Processes formed a key part of the performance review process at the corporate, business unit and divisional levels. The process way of working was brought about through a change in strategic direction, manifesting in changes to the procedures of frontline engineers and other operational staff. Specifically, the empirical research was conducted within the organisation's service ``provision processes'' that provided telephone lines and equipment to external customers (Figure 2). The following section locates each group that took part in the research within their process network using the language of internal customers (i.e. those who make requests) and suppliers (i.e. those who provide the service). The process starts with activities in service centres, where the details of provision jobs are inputted into the computer system following the external customer's request. This automatically lists a number of step-related activities and distributes an initial activity. When a group completes an activity the system creates another activity for the next group. This paper is based upon interviews with employees from the off-line sales team (OL), the operational maintain and control (OMC) and the work manager centre (WMC) and a small number of exchange engineers (EX). The OL deals with jobs that have encountered some problems after the initial customer enquiry. There are ten off-line queues and this research focused on the two that dealt with ``delayed provisions'' and ``sales queries''. These

Figure 2. The provision process

IJSIM 11,3

230

queues would request services from the OMC and job controllers from the work manager centre, e.g. asking engineers to complete a job by a specific date. They would also supply services to the OMC and the WMC for example ± by negotiating job re-appointments with external customers. Domain administrators ± from the WMC ± control the allocation of work to field engineers and are internal customers to the routing and records group, field engineers and the planning and poles group. They supply services to field engineers by helping them with the detail of particular jobs. They would receive services from engineers by asking them to work late on jobs, pass-over their break times, etc. Job controllers monitored the overall progression of jobs through the process and made requests of virtually all the groups in the process. They also supplied services to a number of groups, including the offline sales group, routing and records and planning. Finally, employees from the OMC organise access to telephone exchanges and provide so-called ``star services'' on existing lines. This group was dependent upon the information supplied to them by sales. They were internal customers to the frame centre, exchange engineers and the OL. The OL would often contact the OMC to request immediate exchange access. The OMC would contact the OL to reappoint jobs. In the majority of instances jobs would flow through the provision process as planned and internal services would be allocated automatically. However, many service activities were provided manually by employees contacting other groups over the phone to request service in emergencies or when jobs were in danger of failing to meet appointment times in these instances evidence of social capital emerged in the development of solutions to daily operational problems. The following section discusses the methods that were used to access social capital within the provision process. The research approach Reflecting the exploratory nature of the research, an induction-led approach was developed incorporating qualitative interviews and the analysis of company documentation. A total of 35 semi-structured interviews were conducted with front-line employees from the aforementioned groups, to explore the relational, cognitive and structural dimensions of social capital. While Nahapiet and Ghoshal's (1998) model informed the research, rather than asking direct questions about structural or relational dimensions, employees were asked questions that encouraged them to speak openly about: their interactions with colleagues; the situations where interactions took place; and how individuals perceived these interactions personally, as they impacted upon the effectiveness of the process. Interviews were designed to let themes emerge and tended to last for between 45 minutes to an hour and a quarter. In order to provide a strategic context, in-depth interviews were also conducted with a senior quality manager. Interviews were open and flexible and all were taped, transcribed and coded (Strauss and Corbin, 1990) against the dimensions of the Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) model. Specifically, the interviews were content

analysed (Boyle, 1994) in the following way. When a particular term was Business process mentioned it would be extracted from the text and placed in a file with a title management and memo denoting its meaning which would them be compared to explicit category indicators (Rose, 1982) derived from the model. For example, without prompting, respondents discussed the exchange of favours and how this embedded favoured routes across boundaries. This data informed upon the 231 structural dimension of the model, touching upon how cross functional process networks are perpetuated and kept in a subtle balance through the alignment of vested interests. Memos provided the basis for emergent ``category indicators'' (Rose, 1982) and would be compared with the dimensions in the model to evaluate the extent to which the data exhibited patterns similar to those in the model. This procedure generated over 400 ``content'' items that provided evidence of structural, relational and cognitive dimensions of social capital. A subsequent textual analysis addressed how employees operationalised social capital in the process of delivering services, e.g. when it was employed and to what effect. The results that emerged around this process are presented in the following section. Findings 1. Evidence of social capital in processes? Employees from the different groups interviewed did appear to feel part of the provision process as a whole. Employees recognised attitudes had changed from a strictly functional to a customer-oriented ``process'' perspective. There are still some people that will not do anything without a piece of paper, they are a real pain, but you tend to know those people. It is very process-oriented now, though there are a few jobsworth people, on the whole people are very customer-focused [WMC].

As might be expected, process orientation at the front line appeared to be synonymous with customer service processes. Considerable data related to employees' ability to conceptualise activities in relation to the broader process. Employees recognised that whilst other groups were different in functional terms, the process gave them a shared goal and appeared to provide a context whereby a sense of community could develop. For example, one respondent stated that: They are in a different office and they have a different job, they're engineers, but they are also the same, we are trying to sort out delayed provisions and they often have to sort out jobs that have gone wrong, they have to work with us when they do that, so they are different but . . . what we are trying to do overall is the same, what we are trying to do is stop jobs failing [OL].

The data suggested employees at the front line did talk about processes and understood their daily activities as contributing to a business process. This appeared to lead ± in some cases ± to the development of strong relationships across complex organisational boundaries. Employees from different functional groups would share problems and frequently mentioned the term a ``team outside a team'', which might be viewed as evidence of a front-line ``community'' existing at the process level.

IJSIM 11,3

232

Sometimes if I have had a problem, I'll call John in the OMC and he'll have a go and ± you know ± I really appreciate that and so I'd do the same for him, I can `ìssue order'' for him and he appreciates that, and the rapport you build up because of doing that, we are like a team outside a team [OL].

This illustrates rapport across functional boundaries. It is evidence of social capital existing beyond the domain of functional groups, at the level of the process where extra support could be leveraged from particular relationships. The following sections characterise the nature of social capital existing within the provision process in terms of its structural, relational and cognitive dimensions. 2. Dimensions of social capital in processes The structural dimension. The data provided evidence that cross functional networks at the front-line were in part socially constructed, initiated by cooperative flexible behaviours and sustained though exchange. Hence, the data strongly accessed the inter-related themes of informal structure and social exchange, identified by the literatures as key to the structural dimension, shaping the `ìnterpersonal configuration of people or units'' (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 244). It was apparent that employees had favoured numbers to ring in other departments. This might be evidence of network structure being shaped not only by formal work procedures and specifications, but by the preferences of employees. Employees would often utilise the ``the old boy networks'' that would ``pull strings for them'' across functional boundaries. As might be expected, employees were more likely to return to the colleagues who had behaved flexibly in the past. Individuals would have ``preferred lists'' of colleagues in other departments. Thus network structure across functional boundaries reflected patterns of helping behaviour. We have a list of numbers for sales and those are the ones that we ring . . . so if you were to say ``look I need this cancelled and these things replaced'', the ones we know will say ``yes, we'll do it'', the others will say `Ì'm not sure about this, why aren't you going through the normal rigmarole'' [OMC]. It is the old boy network if you like, I know that if I want to get something done in the OMC I ring John, Martin or Trevor, they will help me out, which is very handy at 5.30pm on a Friday night, there are these unofficial networks if you like [EX].

These responses may be illustrative of social capital, as they highlight the ability to leverage different levels of resource through a particular interpersonal network. Whilst flexibility signalled a willingness to enter networks, long term membership of networks became embedded through exchange (Homans, 1961). This was the mechanism through which ``social credits'' (Bourdieu, 1986) were traded. When individuals provided help for colleagues from other groups they often expected the help should be returned at a later date and common exchange notions of ``fairness'' and ``reciprocity'' (Homans, 1961) were frequently mentioned in relation to sustaining cross-functional network

structure. For example, employees tended not to prolong the provision of Business process `èxtra'' help unless there was clearly something in it for them. Perceptions of management unfair treatment could lead to the reconfiguring of informal structures with individuals de-connecting themselves from particular relationships, whilst a sense of equity (Adams, 1965) helped sustain networks. I mean they want us to do extra things for them and we want them to do things for us and so it is quite clever how, over a period of time, this relationship has developed . . . if you removed these people and replaced them with five others you could have a situation where the two sides don't talk to each other at all [OL]. I'm lucky, in that the engineers I work with are nice guys, in that if you ring them up they will help you out, but if you are stubborn and prickly and you say you are not going to do it, then when you need a favour, they are more likely to treat you in the same way that you treated them [OMC].

The generation of social credits thus acted like an investment in a form of capital creating an obligation to return favours when possible (Blau, 1964). This process acted as a conservative force upon network structure, embedding patterns of behaviour when the interests of individual actors coincided. They tend to go out on a limb to try and help you and there is the reverse as well, they expect us to do quite a lot over and above what we really should be doing for them, you do it because it is an overall thing, you know you'll get the help back when you ask so it's an investment really [OMC].

In summary, the above sections have explored the structural dimension of social capital showing how the configuration of employees within processes can be seen as shaped not only by the formal process design but also by individual preferences and social behaviour. Importantly, there appeared to be a range of overlapping inter-personal networks within the provision process, reflecting individual work histories and friendships. It was possible for individuals to be located within a range of networks associated with particular tasks. This would appear to raise important managerial implications. Within a large process community, it might not be necessary or practical for employees to forge relationships and exchange bonds with a very large number of colleagues. As a result, a number of relatively small networks might emerge in response to particular operational problems. The managerial task in these situations is to monitor the degree of integration and coherence between these networks in terms of objectives and work practices. Social capital theory indicates the power of collective action within networks and process effectiveness might be undermined if networks share divergent goals and work practices. The relational dimension. The research provided support for the notion that particular structural configurations are underpinned by interpersonal commitments between network actors, in addition to the harder economic interests. This data relates to the theory of social capital in at least two ways. First, intangible contributions such as trust and friendship can themselves constitute a tradable resource exchanged between partners (Foa and Foa, 1980).

233

IJSIM 11,3

234

Second, the relational dimensions of social capital can help ``create and leverage'' extra assets (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 244) from existing networks or in some instances ± when absent ± limit the distribution of resources. These points are explored in the following sections. Within the case organisation, service delivery problems were often exacerbated when individuals from cross-functional groups had not constructed close bonds of commitments and the following quotes illustrate how the distribution of resources could be understood in relation to relational issues arising from interactions across functional boundaries. . . . there are times when you might get an engineer who gets your back up, and he's a bit obnoxious or whatever, so you think I'm not going to help you, you've got a bad attitude, someone should take you down a peg or two [WMC]. She kept on saying `Ì want this done now'', `Ì want it done now'' she really wound me up actually. I think she could tell by the tone of my voice, she said `òh, have I upset you''? I said, ``well you have actually'', so she said, `òh why'' but I just didn't have any time for her, so she had to wait for an hour before she had her job done [OMC].

However, where present, employees could leverage more resources by drawing upon particular commitments and friendships. The most commonly repeated feature of interaction that appeared to govern the distribution of resources was ``trust'' reflecting the extent to which requests made over the telephone ± mirrored a genuine customer service need or whether it was just being made to make the colleague's life easier. If people are open and honest with you, you don't mind, if you say `Ì've dropped a clanger can you help me out'', you will. If someone comes through and they try to fudge you it puts your back up a bit, you're less likely to help . . . it's if you trust them that the request is a right thing to ask for [OMC]. Well they trust us that it is going to be a right thing, which is rather fortunate, you certainly wouldn't get some of the things done around here without an element of trust, they have to trust your judgement [WMC].

These expectations inform directly upon social capital as the allocation of resources tended to be dependent upon the accomplishment of complex social interactions, often over the telephone. It is also possible to observe the interaction between the relational and structural dimensions as the generation of trust appeared to impact upon the configuration of network structure, influencing the extent to which individuals would be willing to maintain membership of particular networks. The cognitive dimensions. The data also suggested that cross-functional networks were supported by a shared customer service ethic, that acted as a collective rationale for action: a shared way of thinking and interpreting events. Hence, the data underlined the importance of ``shared representations, interpretations and systems of meaning among parties'' (Cicourel, 1973: quoted in Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 244), what is called the cognitive dimension of social capital.

During the interviews, individuals frequently drew upon the shared Business process representation of colleagues that would ± or would not ± be willing to deviate management from the boundaries of their role, using the term ``jobsworth'' to describe such people. A ``jobsworth'' would not do anything outside a strict functional boundary, whereas process orientation implied a willingness to incur personal costs in order to get jobs through the system. Underpinning this notion was a 235 ``service ethic'' that provided an important way through which status could be inferred through action. Going home at 5.00pm, leaving jobs unfinished, failing to behave flexibly for customer service, being disrespectful to customers who have failed to pay their bills, etc., were all signs ± expressed by respondents ± that colleagues did not share a customer service ethic. This informs upon social capital in at least two ways. First, this infers status that could be viewed as a ``credit'' obtained from participation within a network of relationships. Second, through being known as someone that was not a jobsworth, employees could communicate their willingness to join particular informal networks, thus once more impacting upon the structure of the network. Individuals were more likely to contact colleagues they expected to share a customer service ethos when they needed a favour to provide customer service. While a lack of willingness to engage in these service actions was cited frequently as a rationale for exclusion from inter-personal networks: . . . she does not have the customer care in mind that we do. I'm afraid she treats them like second class citizens if they can't pay a bill, she should keep her thoughts in private . . . it makes dealing with them difficult sometimes, I try to avoid people like that [OL]. We treat customers with far more importance . . . they [jobsworths] chose to go home at five o'clock . . . we stay behind to put in more hours than we need to, when they come through to ask for help you think why should I bother, I know I won't get it back if I need anything after 5.00pm [OL].

Disassociating relational and cognitive dimensions within Nahapiet and Ghoshal's (1998) model involves drawing upon shared interpretive schemes used to oriented the behaviour of individuals towards colleagues. The data indicated that shared cognitive models of customer service were likely to be positively related to both structural and relational dimensions, e.g. as jobsworth it was difficult to gain access to networks and extra support, thus shaping the relational bonds of commitment between colleagues that might emerge. Summary. The above sections have drawn upon qualitative data that emerged around the structural, relational and cognitive dimensions of social capital as they inform upon a process context. Within the discussion about structure, flexibility was discussed in relation to the generation of network ties, whilst exchange and reciprocity appeared to embed network configuration and connectivity (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). Relational dimensions informed upon aspects of trust, rapport and respect, capturing the inter-personal bonds that help sustain networks while also impacting the distribution of resources.

IJSIM 11,3

236

Finally, the cognitive dimension appeared to inform upon a shared construction of a customer service ethic, a form of shared process ``think''. Table I outlines the frequencies with which each aspect was mentioned within the interviews. Table I shows the results of the content analysis and provides an over-view of key themes in the data. It also shows how themes in the data were categorised in relation to the dimensions of social capital and indicates similarities between the responses of the three main groups that participated in the research. Whilst this research is exploratory this might provide a framework, after further refinement, around which research could identify and locate ``pockets'' of social capital within process communities. The data provides evidence that social capital may be generated and used within the daily functioning of the provision process and the following sections examine the operational circumstances where social capital might be employed and to what end. 3. The function of social capital It has been shown that social capital has an impact upon the delivery of service by leveraging extra help and support. This supports the central thesis of social capital theory, that networks of relationships provide a valuable resource for the conducting of social affairs (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 245). However, it is unclear whether social capital is beneficial to the effectiveness of business processes and the following four sections address the function of social capital, addressing when it was used and what impact it had. Dealing with emergencies. Social capital was often employed in `èmergencies''. Jobs in this category caused the organisation embarrassment, incurred the loss of large business orders or placed a customer at risk. The following example is illustrative of the linkage between social capital and the ability of the process to cope with emergencies.

Feature of social capital

Table I. Content measures of social capital dimensions

Structural dimension Reciprocity Requests flexibility Relational dimension Rapport Trust Respect Cognitive dimension Customer service ethic Total

n

OMC

%

n

20 51

17.2 44.0

8 17 8 12 116

Group WMC

OL

%

n

%

16 43

10.8 29.1

2.6 75

12.4 35.9

6.9 14.7 6.9

15 40 13

10.1 27.0 8.8

33 18 18

15.8 8.6 8.6

10.3 100.0

21 148

14.2 100.0

39 209

18.7 100.0

So I had an emergency, like the one I got yesterday, with the epileptic lady. I phoned Tom in control and said, `Ì've got this lady, it is very important''. ``Right'' he said and kicked it into work manager on a 500 code, which is the code for priority business jobs. He shouldn't really have done that but he did it to help me out [OL].

In this instance the respondent faced an emergency, where a failure to deliver service would have put a customer at serious personal risk. Employees appeared to be particularly wary of this kind of job. However, the problem was addressed as the individual was able to target a member of his personal network who was willing to be flexible and help to get the job out of his queue and delivered on time. This can be viewed as embedding membership of a particular network, whilst also perhaps ``callingin'' a previous favour. This notion of calling favours in emergencies was reiterated by a member of the work manager centre in relation to emergency jobs. We do ask people for favours sometimes, can you get this on quick, like in sickness cases, we often call favours from the frame centre, so you ring the frame centre and say ``look we've got a problem, can you do that'' [WMC].

Reports of favour-giving appeared to be more than a figure of speech, reflecting a recognition that some requests had discretionary elements to them, e.g. that colleagues would have to put themselves out in some way to meet the request. The service acted like an investment in social capital as it gave additional evidence of friendship, while it also provided credits to be called back at a later date when the colleagues needed help from the off-line sales team. Service recovery. Service recovery is often discussed in relation to ``coping when things go wrong''. Managers in the process encouraged engineers to recover services on-site. This often involved engineers utilising networks of colleagues over the phone. Preferred networks were also evident when jobs needed recovering. We had problems at one of the hotels in town, they were `òff-air'', the guy was jumping up and down on the spot, he said, ``look, there is a [respondent organisation] conference in the main meeting room'' and you think `òh my God''. He said, ``look, I want service now''. So I rang up and said `Ì want these lines diverted to at least give them something coming through'', I got ``well, I don't know if I can do that'' or ``well, I don't know about that''. So I rang up Martin on my cell phone and I said ``look Martin there are these numbers I want them done fairly quickly''. He said ``yep, no problem'', and he did it there and then. So I said to the hotel manager, ``right the lines are transferred so you at least have some service coming in'', he said ``no way''. ``Well', I said, `ùse one of them'', he did, and he said, ``yes it's working'', but if Martin had not done that for me I would have been absolutely stuffed [FE].

This quote stresses both the structural and cognitive dimensions discussed above. It identifies the use of the individual's interpersonal network, while also indicating the shared perception, between the two colleagues, that recovering the service was more important than necessarily operating by formal procedures, thus highlighting the role played by customer service ethos.


237

IJSIM 11,3

238

Dealing with ineffective sub-processes. Importantly, in some instances social capital supported ways of working that contradicted managers' wishes. These services were often provided to improve the effectiveness of the process, from the front-line employees' point of view. We are told to be wary of that, that we should not be there to solve their [field engineers'] dayto-day problems . . . but there is a practical aspect to our willingness to help, because you know that one minute's work here could save that guy half an hour, well more sometimes, you think to yourself, well how stupid that process is that will not allow me one minute to save him 30 [WMC].

In this example, the respondent was willing to invest in social capital because he saw clear implications for the effectiveness of the whole process. This point was repeated many times. That was a chap from number allocation, they want me to do three lines, that's a favour that is. He says he's phoned up 150 numerous times and they were just saying ``no we can't do that'', I mean what, it just takes two minutes to do that, I'd do that because it'll save him more time than that in the long run [OL].

In this case the respondent was willing to help the colleague because of issues of effectiveness at a process level. It made sense for her to help because it supported the collective activities of the whole process. This underlines an interesting feature of social capital, that once individuals have bought into the collective interests of the process they may be more likely to engage in selfless acts that support the common good, rather than the individual's own selfinterested goals. It also highlights the meta-level of community within processes, extending beyond the immediate interpersonal networks of daily work. However, perhaps more worryingly, it underlines the notion that networks might establish their own goals and ways of working that diverge from the practices of other groups and the wishes of managers. Coping with technological problems. In many instances, employees would utilise social capital to get around technological problems with the process. For example, the (CSS) computer system only allowed OMC and OL employees to process one change of facilities per order per day. Sometimes this was not enough. In these situations, employees from the OMC would send jobs back to the OL to change the order date to ``tomorrow'' so the system could cope with the job which could then be completed that day despite the system thinking it was being completed tomorrow. This involved extra work for the off-line sales team taking them away from their work to provide a particular service. The system will only allow the OMC to process one change of facilities per day, so we have an agreement with them that they can send them back to us and we'll change the date. The agreement was, OK we know them and it is the only agreement we have like it, it is done with a handshake, if you like, but now we have installers phoning back with their stuff asking for the same thing, you can't do it for everyone [OL].

This provides evidence of the relational aspects of social capital existing at the group level, i.e. ``we know them'', ``done with a handshake'', etc. However, problems of inconsistency might arise as networks develop their own solutions

to the problems they face and this further highlights the need for managers to Business process explore the subtle ways in which networks adapt to solve operational problems management in ``their own way''. Summary. The above sections have indicated situations where social capital might be employed. Whilst it is difficult to extrapolate from a single case, we would suggest social capital is likely to be a feature of many complex processes 239 particularly those facing unpredictable demands. Process complexity creates an inability to formalise and standardise all procedures and work practices across networks, to the extent that localised groups and networks might need to ``work out'' ways of working supported by social capital and cross-functional relationships. We suggest pockets of social capital might emerge in response to operational problems, high and varied levels of customer demand that require jobs to be rushed through processes and even technological problems that need to be overcome. Discussion Effective business process management requires an alignment of culture and attitudes to underpin the flow of information, materials or customers across functional boundaries (Garvin, 1995). Few organisations have developed business process management while abandoning any trace of functionality (Armistead et al., 1999) and the respondent organisation is typical in this respect. The strategic representation of the organisation is in process terms. However within its seven business processes are many of the functions which existed before the adoption of business process management. At first sight this ambiguity between process and function could be a potential managerial problem. However, this research shows that front-line employees are able to accept both their functional and service process roles. Social capital has been shown to operate at a process level with social credits being traded across functional boundaries. We contend that the presence of social capital contributes to the success of service processes, especially for a series of internal services that lead to a final external customer, as they facilitated a range of behaviours that enabled ``problem'' jobs or situations to be resolved. Figure 3 expresses our findings. In addition, we refer to the operational areas and circumstances where we think social capital may function to create successful outcomes. It is important to recognise that social networks, in the main, reinforced good service practices and could be seen as an aspect of service culture, Figure 3. For example, GroÈnroos (1991) argues that a distinct service-oriented culture tells employees how to respond to new and unforeseen situations and within complex service delivery processes shared social capital can act as the mechanism by which things get done. Our research indicates that managers can help initiate and maintain social capital in a number of ways. Where front-line staff perceive inefficiencies in processes, managers must become sensitive to the informal means through which employees attempt to overcome problems. In addition, the relational

IJSIM 11,3

240

Figure 3. Social capital in service processes

dimensions of social capital may be encouraged by managers through recognition systems where employees are rewarded for outstanding levels of internal service. These may facilitate the formation of informal networks across functional boundaries. Social capital is also likely to be maintained and developed when employees are encouraged to travel to other parts of the process. Employees may come to understand more the pressures other groups are under and develop greater empathy with them whilst helping generate a shared ethos. However, it should be recognised that social capital is generated during interactions between employees and inappropriate actions of individuals may destroy social capital generated over many months, hence managers might wish to explore ways in which the expectations of different service groups might converge (Llewellyn, 2001). We are suggesting that social capital can ± to some degree ± be managed, and that it has a value (Table II). Measures of value are multi-dimensional and intangible within the structural, relational and cognitive dimensions. It is also hard to understand the relative weighting to give to each category. At an operational level we suggest that the value of social capital might be linked to key performance measures. For instance, we expect that the effective management of social capital, i.e. increasing its value, will have implications for service delivery process performance. At the process level social capital clearly has implications for the effective operation of the process, for failure prevention and service recovery. Here the need for recovery might be at the level of internal process boundaries or external customers. Actions taken in the service process to anticipate failure have the potential to achieve good service performance and productive use of resources. Doing favours and helping out was based on the trust that

Initiating social capital Maintaining social capital Actions which diminish social capital

Individuals

Managers

Flexibility behaviour Understand end-to-end process Learn rules of the game Develop customer focus Reciprocate help when requested Respect emerging process norms Build trusting relationships Reneging on implied agreements with colleagues High turnover of staff

Clear processes and sub-processes Effective network technology Shared customer service training Regular inter-group visits Out of hours social events at the process level Process re-design Inadequate training Restrictive performance measures

colleagues would reciprocate on other occasions. Service recovery for internal service providers was driven by social factors within the network, e.g. staff being willing to take risks and act independently of procedures in exchange for social capital. However, whether this is always for the good of external customers is not clear. Particularly strong informal networks may facilitate the provision of internal services that contrast with managerial instructions, thus acting to help a colleague might contradict procedures for a process and this may have serious implications for organisational effectiveness. Managers assessing service recovery strategies should question the way that internal and external service recovery takes place, in what circumstances, and with what outcomes for social capital. Finally, the research has implications for the formulation of service strategy and the structural design of service systems. The use of the service profit chain relies heavily on the role of service teams to link the internal service process and external effects on customers (Heskett et al., 1997; Rucci et al., 1998). The emphasis here is the relationship between elements of service quality, employee satisfaction and loyalty and the value of the services to customer retention and subsequent profitability. The notion of social capital contributes to explanations for some of the statistical correlations, which have been established between the elements. Exploration of the complex relationships of individuals, groups and customers within sub-processes could reveal the managerial problems associated with the implementation of service strategy. Here, the greater the impact of social networks on the way in which service is delivered, the more we would expect social capital to be a significant factor in the service profit chain. While the relationship between formalised procedure and complexity of task has been recognised by previous researchers (Mills and Morris, 1992) the present results suggest the need for a greater understanding of how social behaviours develop and the extent to which any service relies on them for effective service performance. Such knowledge would help managers to appreciate the extent to which service competencies are embedded within social relationships as much as within the proceduralised design or technological systems of service delivery processes.


241 Table II. Managing social capital

IJSIM 11,3

242

Conclusion This paper has identified evidence for social capital existing at the level of process, and we have introduced and developed a theoretical framework for other researchers to explore these issues further. However, this research is subject to a number of limitations. The case study method presents limitations of generalisation to other cases and therefore further research is required to explore the relationship between service performance and the existence of social capital. It may be fruitful to explore these themes within different types of service processes. Further research might also address the limitations of this study, with its reliance upon qualitative data and employ quantitative methods to explore the relationships between the different dimensions of social capital and process performance. References Adams, J.S. (1965), `Ìnequality in social exchange'', in Berkowitz, L (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY, Vol. 2, pp. 267-99. Armistead, C. and Rowland, P. (1996), Managing Business Processes: BPR and Beyond, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Armistead, C., Prichard, J.P. and Machin, S. (1999), ``Strategic business process management for organisational effectiveness'', Long Range Planning, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 96-106. Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Bourdieu, P. (1986), ``The forms of capital'', in J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Sociology and Research for Education, Greenwood, New York, NY, pp. 241-58. Boyle, J.S. (1994), ``Styles of ethnography'', in Morse, J.M. (Ed.), Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 159-85, Burt, R.S. (1992), Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Chaston, I. (1994), `Ìnternal customer management and service gaps in the UK manufacturing sector'', International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 9, pp. 45-56. Cicourel, A.V. (1973), Cognitive Sociology, Penguin Books,Harmondsworth. Davis, T.V.R. (1991), `Ìnternal service operations'', Organisational Dynamics, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 5-22. Foa, E.B. and Foa, U.G. (1980), ``Resource theory: interpersonal behaviour as exchange'', in Gergen, K.J., Greenberg, M.S. and Willis, R.H. (Eds), Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, Plumum, New York, NY. Garvin, D. (1995), ``Leveraging processes for strategic advantage'', Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp. 77-90. Granovetter, M.S. (1985), `Èconomic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness'', American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, pp. 481-510. Gremler, D.D., Bitner, J. and Evans, K.R. (1994), ``The internal service encounter'', International Journal of Service Industries Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 34-56. GroÈnroos, C. (1991), ``Scandinavian management and the Nordic school of services: contributions to service management and quality'', International Journal of Service Industries Management, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 17-25. Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993), Re-engineering the Corporation, Free Press, New York, NY.

Heskett, J.L., Sasser, W. and Schlesinger, L.A. (1997), The Service Profit Chain: How Leading Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty, Satisfaction and Value, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY. Homans, G.C. (1961), Social Behaviour, Harcourt, Brace and World, New York, NY. Llewellyn, N. (2001), ``The role of psychological contracts within internal service networks'', Service Industries Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1 (forthcoming). Mills, P.K. and Morris, J.H. (1992), ``Some moderating effects of client interaction need on perceived technology and structure in service providers' tasks'', International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 4-13. Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), ``Social capital, intellectual capital and the organisational advantage'', Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 242-66. Porter, M. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Techniques for Analysing Industries and Competitors, Free Press, New York, NY. Reynoso. J and Moores, B. (1995), ``Towards the measurement of internal service quality'', International Journal of Service Industries Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 64-83. Robins, S.P. (1996), Organisational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies and Applications, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Rose, G. (1982), Deciphering Sociological Research, Macmillan Education Ltd, Basingtoke. Rucci, A.J., Kirn, S.P. and Quinn, R.T. (1998), ``The employee customer profit chain'', Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp. 83-97. Schonberger, R.J. (1990), Building a Chain of Customers, Hutchinson, London. Speier, C., Harvey, M. and Palmer, J. (1998), `Ìmplementing intra-organisational learning: an infrastructure to support business process re-engineering'', Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 76-86. Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, London.


243