Governing cloud computing services: Reconsideration of IT governance structures

There is an increase in the uptake of cloud computing services (CCS). CCS is adopted in the form of a utility, and it incorporates business risks of the service providers and intermediaries. Thus, the adoption of CCS will change the risk profile of an organization. In this situation, organizations need to develop competencies by reconsidering their IT governance structures to achieve a desired level of IT-business alignment and maintain their risk appetite to source business value from CCS. We use the resource-based theories to suggest that collaborative board oversight of CCS, competencies relating to CCS information and financial management, and a CCS-related continuous audit program can contribute to business process performance improvements and overall firm performance. Using survey data, we find evidence of a positive association between these IT governance considerations and business process performance. We also find evidence of positive association between business process performance improvements and overall firm performance. The results suggest that the suggested considerations on IT governance structures can contribute to CCS-related IT-business alignment and lead to anticipated business value from CCS. This study provides guidance to organizations on competencies required to secure business value from CCS.

On the expressive power of behavioral profiles

Behavioral profiles have been proposed as a behavioral abstraction of dynamic systems, specifically in the context of business process modeling. A behavioral profile can be seen as a complete graph over a set of task labels, where each edge is annotated with one relation from a given set of binary behavioral relations. Since their introduction, behavioral profiles were argued to provide a convenient way for comparing pairs of process models with respect to their behavior or computing behavioral similarity between process models. Still, as of today, there is little understanding of the expressive power of behavioral profiles. Via counter-examples, several authors have shown that behavioral profiles over various sets of behavioral relations cannot distinguish certain systems up to trace equivalence, even for restricted classes of systems represented as safe workflow nets. This paper studies the expressive power of behavioral profiles from two angles. Firstly, the paper investigates the expressive power of behavioral profiles and systems captured as acyclic workflow nets. It is shown that for unlabeled acyclic workflow net systems, behavioral profiles over a simple set of behavioral relations are expressive up to configuration equivalence. When systems are labeled, this result does not hold for any of several previously proposed sets of behavioral relations. Secondly, the paper compares the expressive power of behavioral profiles and regular languages. It is shown that for any set of behavioral relations, behavioral profiles are strictly less expressive than regular languages, entailing that behavioral profiles cannot be used to decide trace equivalence of finite automata and thus Petri nets.