A Design Science Research Based Business Process Reengineering Methodology to Improve Off Campus Learning Performance in Indonesian Public Universities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20262706Keywords:
Business Process Reengineering, Design Science Research, DEMATEL Based ANP, Higher Education Performance, Off Campus Learning (IKU 2), Indonesian Public UniversitiesAbstract
Introduction: This study developed and validated a Business Process Reengineering (BPR) methodology to improve Key Performance Indicator 2 (IKU 2, students’ off-campus learning experiences) in Indonesian public universities. It focused on Merdeka Belajar Kampus Merdeka (MBKM) processes within a performance-based higher education governance context.
Methods: The study adopted a mixed-methods design within a Design Science Research (DSR) framework. It integrated the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), DEMATEL, and DEMATEL-based Analytic Network Process (DANP) to prioritise and map causal relationships among BPR critical success factors. Data were collected through AHP and DEMATEL questionnaires completed by experts, supported by key informant interviews and document analysis.
Results: The results showed that top management support, effective project management, and technological competence acted as dominant system drivers, while resource allocation, comprehensive planning, and availability of technological infrastructure emerged as the most influential sub-factors. These elements were organised into a three-layer architecture and a BPR–DSR blueprint that guided process redesign, governance adjustments, and dashboard-based monitoring of IKU 2. Pilot application indicated that MBKM data validation time decreased by approximately 25–30 percent compared with the baseline semester, data entry errors were reduced by around 40 percent, and cross-unit coordination improved noticeably.
Conclusions: The study extended BPR scholarship to performance-based higher education governance, demonstrated the usefulness of hybrid multi-criteria decision-making within a DSR cycle, and offered PTN-BH institutions a practical roadmap for evidence-based process transformation aligned with national performance targets.
References
1. Aniskina NN, Azarov VN. The Special Aspects of Quality Management of the Organization at the Stage of Digital Transformation. In: 2022 International Conference on Quality Management, Transport and Information Security, Information Technologies (IT&QM&IS). 2022. p. 11–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ITQMIS56172.2022.9976811
2. Yavuz M, Kayalı B, Karaman S. An Investigation of Digital Transformation Activities of Higher Education in Türkiye. Participatory Educational Research. 2023;10(4):237–55. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.69.10.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.69.10.4
3. Anizar A, Ishak A, Gurusinga RG, Hermansyah. Design of worker rotation for a precast concrete pole factory based on mental workload. Int J Saf Secur Eng. 2025;15(1):151–6. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsse.150116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsse.150116
4. Omidi A, Khoshtinat B. Factors Affecting the Implementation of Business Process Reengineering: Taking into Account the Moderating Role of Organizational Culture (Case Study: Iran Air). Procedia Economics and Finance. 2016;36:425–32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212567116300582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30058-2
5. Amarantou Vasiliki and Kazakopoulou S and CP and CD. Attitude Toward Change: Factors Affecting Hospital Managerial Employees’ Resistance to Change. In: Kavoura Androniki and Sakas DP and TP, editor. Strategic Innovative Marketing. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 251–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56288-9_34
6. Abdous M. Towards a framework for business process reengineering in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 2011 Aug 1;33(4):427–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.585741. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.585741
7. Pasaribu RD, Anggadwita G, Hendayani R, Kotjoprayudi RB, Apiani DIN. Implementation of business process reengineering (Bpr): Case study of official trip procedures in higher education institutions. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management. 2021;14(3):622–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3403
8. Renna P, Colonnese C. A Simulation-Driven Business Process Reengineering Framework for Teaching Assignment Optimization in Higher Education—A Case Study of the University of Basilicata. Applied Sciences. 2025;15(5). https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/5/2756. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app15052756
9. Tarhan A, Turetken O. Critical Success Factors of Business Process Management: Investigating the Coverage of Business Process (Management) Maturity Models. Zenodo; 2016. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3604451.
10. Prawelska-Skrzypek G. Academic Autonomy in the Contemporary University. Journal of Intercultural Management. 2020;12(3):2–29. https://doi.org/10.2478/joim-2020-0043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/joim-2020-0043
11. Pavluš M, Tomeš R, Malec L. Two Proofs and One Algorithm Related to the Analytic Hierarchy Process. J Appl Math. 2018 Jan 1;2018(1):5241537. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5241537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5241537
12. Cheng EWL, Li H, Ho DCK. Analytic hierarchy process (AHP): A defective tool when used improperly. Measuring Business Excellence. 2002 Dec 1;6(4):33–7. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040210451697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040210451697
13. Noviyanti, Rumengan AE, Khadaffi M, Wibisono C, Dewi NP, Satriawan B, et al. Enhancing job satisfaction in hospitals: The role of communication, career development, continuous dedication and compensation by productivity as a mediator. Int Res J Multidiscip Scope. 2025;6(3):187–200. https://doi.org/10.47857/irjms.2025.v06i03.04443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47857/irjms.2025.v06i03.04443
14. Asim Z, Sorooshian S, Vasudevan A, Yosof Y, Huang T. Navigating supply chain vulnerability: A case study of resilience in Pakistan’s large-scale manufacturing sector. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development. 2024;8(10). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i10.5539
15. Henriques TA, O’Neill H. Design science research with focus groups – a pragmatic meta-model. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. 2021 May 3;16(1):119–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-01-2020-0015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-01-2020-0015
16. Nguyen A, Tuunanen T, Gardner L, Sheridan D. Design principles for learning analytics information systems in higher education. European Journal of Information Systems. 2021 Sep 3;30(5):541–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1816144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1816144
17. Hermansyah H, Amsari D, Ilahi Manvi KI, Susanti R, Kahar A, Saladin K, et al. Salud Ciencia y Tecnología enhancing hospitality competencies: the role of mobile augmented reality in Indonesian vocational schools. Salud Cienc Tecnol. 2025;5:2271. https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20252271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20252271
18. Lee J, Lim C, Kim H. Development of an instructional design model for flipped learning in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2017;65(2):427–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9502-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9502-1
19. Battista A, Torre D. Mixed methods research designs. Med Teach. 2023 Jun 3;45(6):585–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2200118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2200118
20. Creamer Elizabeth G, Collins Kathleen M T, Poth Cheryl. The implications of a mixed methods way of thinking to practice. Method Innov. 2025 Mar 1;18(1):51–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991251325470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991251325470
21. Hermansyah H, Reni AT, Richmayati M, Saladin K, Kahar A. Quality – Access to Success factors influencing the adoption of electronic money in the digital age. Qual Access Success. 2025;26(208):14–20. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/26.208.03. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/26.208.03
22. Teixeira JG, Patrício L, Tuunanen T. Advancing service design research with design science research. Journal of Service Management. 2019 Nov 15;30(5):577–92. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-05-2019-0131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-05-2019-0131
23. Elia G, Solazzo G, Lerro A, Pigni F, Tucci CL. The digital transformation canvas: A conceptual framework for leading the digital transformation process. Bus Horiz. 2024;67(4):381–98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681324000454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2024.03.007
24. Fetais A, Abdella GM, Al-Khalifa KN, Hamouda AM. Business Process Re-Engineering: A Literature Review-Based Analysis of Implementation Measures. Information. 2022;13(4). https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/13/4/185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/info13040185
25. Irawati I, Hermansyah, Dewi FS, Sari CY, Parisma WI, Maulina D, et al. The role of individual characteristics and personal hygiene with dermatitis complaints in fishermen. Univ J Public Health. 2024;12(6):1166–73. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujph.2024.120613. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13189/ujph.2024.120613
26. Kerpedzhiev GD, König UM, Röglinger M, Rosemann M. An Exploration into Future Business Process Management Capabilities in View of Digitalization. Business & Information Systems Engineering. 2021;63(2):83–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-020-00637-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-020-00637-0
27. Huy PQ, Phuc VK. Unveiling how business process management capabilities foster dynamic decision-making for effectiveness of sustainable digital transformation. Business Process Management Journal. 2025 Feb 26;31(8):67–103. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2024-0467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2024-0467
28. Vukšić Vesna Bosilj, Bach Mirjana Pejić, Tomičić-Pupek Katarina. Process Performance Management in Higher Education. International Journal of Engineering Business Management. 2014 Jan 1;6:11. https://doi.org/10.5772/58680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/58680
29. Engku Abdullah EM, Yakob R, B.A.M HS. Governance, Enterprise Risk Management, and Public Higher Education Performance: A Systematic Literature Review. In 2024. p. 27–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7808-9_2
30. Susnjak T, Ramaswami GS, Mathrani A. Learning analytics dashboard: a tool for providing actionable insights to learners. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2022;19(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00313-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00313-7
31. Chen L, Geng X, Lu M, Shimada A, Yamada M. How Students Use Learning Analytics Dashboards in Higher Education: A Learning Performance Perspective. Sage Open. 2023 Aug 19;13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231192151
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Khalida Syahputri, Rosnani Ginting, Humala L. Napitupulu, Aulia Ishak (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
