Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Paradigms for Reducing Process Modeling Cost

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Innovation in Medicine and Healthcare Systems, and Multimedia

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 145))

Abstract

Business process models provide a considerable number of benefits for enterprises and organizations, but the creation of such models is costly and time-consuming, which slows down the organizational adoption of business process modeling. Social paradigms pave new ways for business process modeling by integrating stakeholders and leveraging knowledge sources. However, empirical research about the impact of social paradigms on costs of business process modeling is sparse. A better understanding of their impact could help to reduce the cost of business process modeling and improve decision-making on BPM activities. The paper contributes to this field by reporting about an empirical investigation via survey research on the perceived influence of different cost factors among experts. Our results indicate that different cost components, as well as the use of social paradigms, influence cost.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

References

  1. Goasduff, L.: BPM Is Critical to Business Transformation Success, http://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/bpm-is-critical-to-business-transformation-success/

  2. Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. White, S.A.: Introduction to BPMN. IBM Cooperation. 2008–029 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Scheer, A.W.: ARIS-Business Process Modeling. Springer, Berlin (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Becker, J., Beverungen, D., Knackstedt, R.: Reference models and modeling languages for product-service systems status-quo and perspectives for further research. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual, pp. 105–105 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Indulska, M., Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P.: Business process modeling: Current issues and future challenges. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 501–514. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Aysolmaz, B., Reijers, H.A.: Use cases for understanding business process models. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 428–442. Springer, Berlin (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part A. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 12, 249–254 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Taylor, F.W.: The Principles of Scientific Management, vol. 202. New York. (1911)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Erol, S., Granitzer, M., Happ, S., Jantunen, S., Jennings, B., Johannesson, P., Koschmider, A., Nurcan, S., Rossi, D., Schmidt, R.: Combining BPM and social software: contradiction or chance? J. Softw. Maint. Evol.: Res. Pract. 22, 449–476 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Benkler, Y.: The Wealth of Networks : How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Surowiecki, J.: The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies. Societies and Nations, Anchor (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Granovetter, M.: The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociol. Theory 1, 201–233 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 44, 5–23 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Drawehn, J., Höß, O.: Social BPM. Business Process Management Tools 2014. Fraunhofer Verlag, Stuttgart (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Alotaibi, Y.: Business process modelling challenges and solutions: a literature review. J. Intell. Manuf. 27, 701–723 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Becker, J., Rosemann, M., Von Uthmann, C.: Guidelines of business process modeling. In: Business Process Management, pp. 30–49. Springer, Berlin (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cost. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/cost.html

  20. Möhring, M., Walsh, G., Schmidt, R., Koot, C., Härting, R.-C.: Präventives retourenmanagement im eCommerce. HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik. 50, 66–75 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Möhring, M., Schmidt, R., Sandkuhl, K.: Flexible Entscheidungsmechanismen Implementierung eines dynamischen präventiven Retourenmanagements. In: ERP-Management - Zeitschrift für unternehmensweite Anwendungssysteme, pp. 20–22 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  22. vom Brocke, J.: Design principles for reference modeling: reusing information models by means of aggregation, specialisation, instantiation, and analogy. In: Reference Modeling for Business Systems Analysis, pp. 47–76. IGI Global (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Laguna, M., Marklund, J.: Business Process Modeling, Simulation and Design. Chapman and Hall/CRC (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vom Brocke, J.: Referenzmodellierung: Gestaltung und Verteilung von Konstruktionsprozessen. Jan vom Brocke (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Mäesalu, R., Reijers, H., Semenenko, N.: Understanding business process models: the costs and benefits of structuredness. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 31–46. Springer, Berlin (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cooper, R., Kaplan, R.S.: Profit priorities from activity-based costing. Harvard Bus. Rev. 69, 130–135 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Mutschler, B., Reichert, M.: Understanding the costs of business process management technology. In: Business Process Management, pp. 157–194. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nissen, V., Petsch, M., Termer, F., Möhring, M.: A cost calculation model for determining the cost of business process modelling projects. Universitätsbibliothek Ilmenau (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wolff, F.: Ökonomie multiperspektivischer Unternehmensmodellierung: IT-Controlling für modell-basiertes Wissensmanagement. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Baiao, F., Revoredo, K., Silveira, B., Klussmann, F.: Effort estimation of business process modeling through clustering techniques. iSys-Revista Brasileira de Sistemas de Informação. 7, 34–47 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Baumann, F., Milutinovic, A., Roller, D.: Software engineering inspired cost estimation for process modelling. Optimization. 2, 5 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Boehm, B., Clark, B., Horowitz, E., Westland, C., Madachy, R., Selby, R.: Cost models for future software life cycle processes: COCOMO 2.0. Ann. Softw. Eng. 1, 57–94 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Boehm, B., Abts, C., Chulani, S.: Software development cost estimation approaches—A survey. Ann. Softw. Eng. 10, 177–205 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kemerer, C.F.: An empirical validation of software cost estimation models. Commun. ACM 30, 416–429 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Niazi, A., Dai, J.S., Balabani, S., Seneviratne, L.: Product cost estimation: Technique classification and methodology review. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 128, 563–575 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Schmidt, R., Nurcan, S.: BPM and social software. In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J., Aalst, W., Mylopoulos, J., Rosemann, M., Shaw, M.J., and Szyperski, C. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops, pp. 649–658. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Nurcan, S., Schmidt, R.: Introduction to the first international workshop on business process management and social software (BPMS2 2008). In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J., Aalst, W., Mylopoulos, J., Rosemann, M., Shaw, M.J., Szyperski, C. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops, pp. 647–648. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. J. Mark. 68, 1–17 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cooper, D.R., Schindler, P.S., Sun, J.: Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Recker, J.: Scientific Research in Information Systems: A Beginner’s Guide. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  41. Kohavi, R., Henne, R.M., Sommerfield, D.: Practical guide to controlled experiments on the web: listen to your customers not to the hippo. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 959–967. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  42. LimeSurvey–the free and open source survey software tool !, http://www.limesurvey.org/de/start

  43. Allen, I.E., Seaman, C.A.: Likert scales and data analyses. Qual. Prog. 40, 64–65 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Dumas, M., Ter Hofstede, A.H.: UML activity diagrams as a workflow specification language. In: UML, pp. 76–90. Springer, Berlin (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Becker, J., Pfeiffer, D., Räckers, M.: Domain specific process modelling in public administrations–the PICTURE-approach. In: Electronic Government, pp. 68–79 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Salkind, N.J.: Encyclopedia of research design. Sage (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kamhawi, E.M.: Critical factors for implementation success of ERP systems: an empirical investigation from Bahrain. Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 3, 34 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lewis, B.R., Templeton, G.F., Byrd, T.A.: A methodology for construct development in MIS research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 14, 388–400 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Choudhary, V., Vithayathil, J.: The impact of cloud computing: should the it department be organized as a cost center or a profit center? J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 30, 67–100 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., Wißotzki, M.: Enterprise Modeling. Springer, Berlin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Henderson-Sellers, B., Ralyté, J.,\AAgerfalk, P.J., Rossi, M.: Situational Method Engineering. Springer, Berlin (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Frank, U.: Multilevel modeling. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 6, 319–337 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Benkenstein, M., Fellmann, M., Leyer, M., Sandkuhl, K.: The value of enterprise modelling: towards a service-centric perspective. In: IFIP Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 299–306. Springer, Berlin (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Schmidt, R., Möhring, M., Keller, B.: Customer relationship management in a public cloud environment–key influencing factors for european enterprises. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4241–4250 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Hauder, M., Roth, S., Schulz, C., Matthes, F.: An examination of organizational factors influencing enterprise architecture management challenges. In: ECIS, p. 175 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  56. O’Keefe, R.M., Balci, O., Smith, E.P.: Validation of expert system performance. Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (1986)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Munich University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany

    Rainer Schmidt & Michael Möhring

  2. University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany

    Kurt Sandkuhl

  3. Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Germany

    Alfred Zimmermann

Authors
  1. Rainer Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Möhring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kurt Sandkuhl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alfred Zimmermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rainer Schmidt .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kusuatsu, Shiga, Japan

    Yen-Wei Chen

  2. Faculty of Informatics, Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

    Alfred Zimmermann

  3. Shoreham-by-sea, UK

    Robert J. Howlett

  4. University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Lakhmi C. Jain

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schmidt, R., Möhring, M., Sandkuhl, K., Zimmermann, A. (2019). Social Paradigms for Reducing Process Modeling Cost. In: Chen, YW., Zimmermann, A., Howlett, R., Jain, L. (eds) Innovation in Medicine and Healthcare Systems, and Multimedia. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 145. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8566-7_37

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation