Abstract
In an investigation into the process of process modeling, we examined how modeling behavior relates to the quality of the process model that emerges from that. Specifically, we considered whether (i) a modeler’s structured modeling style, (ii) the frequency of moving existing objects over the modeling canvas, and (iii) the overall modeling speed is in any way connected to the ease with which the resulting process model can be understood. In this paper, we describe the exploratory study to build these three conjectures, clarify the experimental set-up and infrastructure that was used to collect data, and explain the used metrics for the various concepts to test the conjectures empirically. We discuss various implications for research and practice from the conjectures, all of which were confirmed by the experiment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Rittgen, P.: Quality and perceived usefulness of process models. In: Proc. SAC 2010, pp. 65–72. ACM (2010)
Mendling, J.: Metrics for Process Models. LNBIP, vol. 6. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. Eur. J. of Information Systems 15(1), 91–102 (2006)
Becker, J., Rosemann, M., von Uthmann, C.: Guidelines of Business Process Modeling. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 30–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Information and Software Technology 52(2), 127–136 (2010)
Mendling, J., Sánchez-González, L., García, F., La Rosa, M.: Thresholds for error probability measures of business process models. Journal of Systems and Software 85(5), 1188–1197 (2012)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: A study into the factors that influence the understandability of business process models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A 41(3), 449–462 (2011)
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weber, B.: Investigating the process of process modeling with cheetah experimental platform. In: Proc. ER-POIS 2010, pp. 13–18 (2010)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Recker, J.C.: Business Process Quality Management. In: Handbook on Business Process Management, vol. 1, pp. 167–185. Springer (2010)
Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Complexity metrics for business process models. In: Proc. ICBIS 2006, pp. 1–12 (2006)
Vanderfeesten, I., Cardoso, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Quality metrics for business process models. In: BPM and Workflow Handbook, pp. 179–190 (2007)
Indulska, M., Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P.: Business Process Modeling: Current Issues and Future Challenges. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 501–514. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Soffer, P., Kaner, M., Wand, Y.: Towards Understanding the Process of Process Modeling: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2011, Part I. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 357–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Crapo, A.W., Waisel, L.B., Wallace, W.A., Willemain, T.R.: Visualization and the process of modeling: a cognitive-theoretic view. In: Proc. ACM SIGKDD 2000, pp. 218–226 (2000)
Morris, W.T.: On the art of modeling. Management Science 13(12), 707–717 (1967)
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weidlich, M., Fahland, D., Weber, B., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Tracing the Process of Process Modeling with Modeling Phase Diagrams. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2011, Part I. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 370–382. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weber, B., Fahland, D., Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How the Structuring of Domain Knowledge Helps Casual Process Modelers. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds.) ER 2010. LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 445–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Breuker, D., Pfeiffer, D., Becker, J.: Reducing the variations in intra-and interorganizational business process modeling–an empirical evaluation. In: Proc. WI 2009, pp. 203–212 (2009)
Miller, G.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63(2), 81–97 (1956)
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J., Tabbers, H.: Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational 38(1), 63–71 (2003)
Demarco, T., Lister, T.: Programmer performance and the effects of the workplace. In: Proc. ICSE 1985, pp. 268–272 (1985)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Sidorova, H., Verbeek, H.M.W., Voorhoeve, M., Wynn, M.T.: Soundness of workflow nets: classification, decidability, and analysis. Formal Aspects of Computing 23(3), 333–363 (2011)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., et al.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. Journal of Circuits Systems and Computers 8(1), 21–66 (1998)
Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Information and Software Technology 50(12), 1281–1294 (2008)
Wolf, K.: Generating Petri Net State Spaces. In: Kleijn, J., Yakovlev, A. (eds.) ICATPN 2007. LNCS, vol. 4546, pp. 29–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Decker, G., Mendling, J.: Process instantiation. Data & Knowledge Engineering 68(9), 777–792 (2009)
OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) version 2.0 (2011)
McGill, R., Tukey, J., Larsen, W.A.: Variations of box plots. The American Statistician 32(1), 12–16 (1978)
Cegielski, C.: What makes a good programmer? Communications of the ACM 49(10), 73–75 (2006)
Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H., Leymann, F.: Faster and More Focused Control-Flow Analysis for Business Process Models Through SESE Decomposition. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 43–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Laue, R., Mendling, J.: The Impact of Structuredness on Error Probability of Process Models. In: Kaschek, R., Kop, C., Steinberger, C., Fliedl, G. (eds.) UNISCON 2008. LNBIP, vol. 5, pp. 585–590. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Lumley, T., Diehr, P., Emerson, S., Chen, L.: The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Review of Public Health 23, 151–169 (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Claes, J. et al. (2012). Tying Process Model Quality to the Modeling Process: The Impact of Structuring, Movement, and Speed. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds) Business Process Management. BPM 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7481. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32885-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32885-5_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32884-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32885-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)