Skip to main content

On a Study of Layout Aesthetics for Business Process Models Using BPMN

  • Conference paper
Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN 2010)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 67))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

As BPMN spreads among a constantly growing user group, it is indispensable to analyze the expectations of users towards the appearance of a BPMN model. The user groups are mostly inhomogeneous since users stem from different backgrounds, e.g. IT, managerial sciences or economics. It is conceivable that BPMN novices may have different issues compared to higher skilled modeling experts. When this large set of users starts modeling, the expectations considering the graphical outcome of the modeling process may differ significantly.

In this work, we analyze layout preferences of user groups when modeling with BPMN. We present a set of layout criteria that are formalized and then confirmed by a user study. The conduction of the study reveals preferences of single user groups with respect to secondary notation and layout aesthetics. From our results, proposals for adaptions of software tools towards different BPMN users can be derived.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Effinger, P., Siebenhaller, M., Kaufmann, M.: An Interactive Layout Tool for BPMN. IEEE International Conference on E-Commerce Technology 1, 399–406 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kitzmann, I., König, C., Lübke, D., Singer, L.: A Simple Algorithm for Automatic Layout of BPMN Processes. In: CEC, pp. 391–398 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Siebenhaller, M., Kaufmann, M.: Drawing activity diagrams. Technical Report WSI-2006-02, Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Siebenhaller, M., Kaufmann, M.: Drawing activity diagrams. In: Proceedings of ACM 2006 Symposium on Software Visualization, SoftVis 2006, pp. 159–160. ACM, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Schrepfer, M., Wolf, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: The impact of secondary notation on process model understanding. In: PoEM, pp. 161–175 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Petre, M.: Why looking isn’t always seeing: Readership skills and graphical programming. ACM Commun. 38(6), 33–44 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Green, T.R., Blackwell, A.F.: A tutorial on cognitive dimensions(1998) (last accessed 2010-05-31)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Purchase, H.C.: Which aesthetic has the greatest effect on human understanding. In: DiBattista, G. (ed.) GD 1997. LNCS, vol. 1353, pp. 248–261. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Purchase, H.C., Allder, J.A., Carrington, D.A.: User preference of graph layout aesthetics: A UML study. In: Marks, J. (ed.) GD 2000. LNCS, vol. 1984, pp. 5–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Tamassia, R., DiBattista, G., Eades, P., Tollis, I.: Graph Drawing. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Siebenhaller, M.: Orthogonal Drawings with Constraints: Algorithms And Applications. PhD thesis, Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut, University of Tuebingen (2009) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Seiz, S., Effinger, P., Jogsch, N., Wehrstein, T.: Forschungsprojekt: Usability-Evaluation von BPMN-konformer Geschäftsprozessmodellierungssoftware. In: Arbeitsberichte zur Wirtschaftsinformatik 35, Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Universität Tübingen (April 2010) (German)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ambler, S.W.: The Elements of UML 2.0 Style. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Huang, W., Hong, S.H., Eades, P.: Effects of sociogram drawing conventions and edge crossings in social network visualization. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 11(2), 397–429 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Cardoso, J.: What makes process models understandable? In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Gehring, U.W., Weins, C.: Grundkurs Statistik für Politologen und Soziologen, 5th edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (2009) (German)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Petre, M.: Cognitive dimensions ‘beyond the notation’. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 17(4), 292–301 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ware, C., Purchase, H.C., Colpoys, L., McGill, M.: Cognitive measurements of graph aesthetics. Information Visualization 1(2), 103–110 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sun, D., Wong, K.: On evaluating the layout of UML class diagrams for program comprehension. In: IWPC, pp. 317–326 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Eichelberger, H.: Aesthetics and Automatic Layout of UML Class Diagrams, PhD thesis, Universität Würzburg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jensen, K.: Coloured Petri nets: basic concepts, analysis methods and practical use. Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series, vol. 2. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Coleman, M.K., Parker, D.S.: Aesthetics-based graph layout for human consumption. Software – Practice and Experience 26(12), 1415–1438 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Genero, M., Poels, G., Piattini, M.: Defining and validating metrics for assessing the understandability of entity-relationship diagrams. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(3), 534–557 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Purchase, H.C., Cohen, R.F., James, M.I.: Validating graph drawing aesthetics. In: Brandenburg, F.J. (ed.) GD 1995. LNCS, vol. 1027, pp. 435–446. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Apfelbacher, R., Knöpfel, A., Aschenbrenner, P., Preetz, S.: FMC visualization guidelines (2006), http://www.fmc-modeling.org/visualization_guidelines

  26. Huang, W., Hong, S.H., Eades, P.: Effects of crossing angles. In: PacificVis, pp. 41–46 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Huang, W., Eades, P., Hong, S.H.: Beyond time and error: a cognitive approach to the evaluation of graph drawings. In: BELIV 2008: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on BEyond Time and Errors, pp. 1–8. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hahn, J., Kim, J.: Why are some diagrams easier to work with? effects of diagrammatic representation on the cognitive intergration process of systems analysis and design. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 6(3), 181–213 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Effinger, P., Jogsch, N., Seiz, S. (2010). On a Study of Layout Aesthetics for Business Process Models Using BPMN. In: Mendling, J., Weidlich, M., Weske, M. (eds) Business Process Modeling Notation. BPMN 2010. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 67. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16298-5_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16298-5_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16297-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16298-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics