Advertisement

Business Process Models (BPMN and DEMO Notation) - Usability Study

  • Petra PavlickovaEmail author
  • Josef Pavlicek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 366)

Abstract

This paper deals with the comparison of BPMN and DEMO process modelling tools in the form of Usability study. The authors present the methods used to compare, define the appropriate equipment of the laboratory and propose the CASE study model. The results from the two CASE studies performed are critical and define the conclusion. The result is a recommendation when it is advisable to use BPMN and when DEMO. Another result is the proposed method of verification of process modelling tools.

Keywords

BPMN DEMO Eye tracking Usability study Process modelling tools 

References

  1. 1.
    Pavlicek, J., Hronza, R., Pavlickova, P., Jelinkova, K.: The business process model quality metrics. In: Pergl, R., Lock, R., Babkin, E., Molhanec, M. (eds.) Enterprise and Organizational Modeling and Simulation. LNBIP, vol. 298, pp. 134–148. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68185-6_10. ISBN: 978-3-319-68184-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pavlicek, J., Hronza, R., Pavlickova, P.: Educational business process model skills improvement. In: Pergl, R., Molhanec, M., Babkin, E., Fosso Wamba, S. (eds.) EOMAS 2016. LNBIP, vol. 272, pp. 172–184. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49454-8_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hronza, R., Pavlíček, J., Náplava, P.: Míry kvality procesních modelů vytvořených v notaci BPMN. Acta Inform. Pragensia 4(2), 140–153 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jelínková, K.: Návrh měr kvality obchodních procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lassaková, M.: Návrh a tvorba měr pro výpočet kvality procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neumann, M.: Míry kvality procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hronza, R., Pavlíček, J., Mach, R., Náplava, P.: Míry kvality v procesním modelování. Acta Inform. Pragensia 4(1), 18–29 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mach, R.: Návrh a tvorba nástroje pro optimalizaci procesů na základě analýzy BPM modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bruce, S.: BPMN Method and Style. Cody-Cassidy Press, Aptos (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    OMG: Business Process Model & Notation (BPMN) (2016). http://www.omg.org/bpmn/index.htm. Accessed 21 Mar 2017
  11. 11.
    Knott, R., Merunka, V., Polak, J.: The BORM methodology: a third-generation fully object-oriented. Knowl. Based Syst. (2003).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-7051(02)00075-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bassetto, L.: OntoUML Specification. http://ontology.com.br/ontouml/spec/
  13. 13.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language (UML) (2008). http://www.uml.org
  14. 14.
    Náplava, P., Pergl, R.: Empirical study of applying the demo method for improving bpmn process models in academic environment. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Conference on Business Informatics, pp. 18–26. IEEE Operations Center, Piscataway (2015). ISBN: 978-1-4673-7340-1Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nielsen Norman Group: Evidence-Based User Experience Research. https://www.nngroup.com/
  16. 16.
    Nielsen, J.: Why you only need to test with 5 users. Jakob Nielsens Alertbox, vol. 19, pp. 1–4 (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pavlicek, J., Bock, R.: Collaborative Usability lab design and methodology to use that, part of HUBRU (2017). http://hubru.pef.czu.cz
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Pavlicek, J., Svec, V., Pavlickova, P., Kreckova, J.: FactOrEasy© Game. In: ERIE 2016 (2016). ISBN: 978-80-213-2646-0. WOS: 000389901400056Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Svec, V., Pavlicek, J., Ticha, I., Kreckova, J.: FactOrEasy©: art and craft of management? In: ERIE 2016 (2016). ISBN: 978-80-213-2646-0. WOS: 000389901400072Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nielsen, J., Mack, R.L.: Usability Inspection Methods. Wiley, New York (1994). ISBN: 0-471-01877-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Merunka, V.: Object-oriented process modeling and simulation – borm experience. Trakia J. Sci. 8(8), 71–87 (2010). http://www.uni-sz.bgGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pavlicek, J., Pavlickova, P.: Methods for evaluating the quality of process modelling tools. In: Pergl, R., Babkin, E., Lock, R., Malyzhenkov, P., Merunka, V. (eds.) EOMAS 2018. LNBIP, vol. 332, pp. 171–177. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00787-4_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Information TechnologyCTUPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations