THE DIAGNOSIS OF INFORMATION POTENTIAL OF SELECTED BUSINESS PROCESS MODELLING NOTATIONS

• Authors: Gabryelczyk Renata , Jurczuk Arkadiusz
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper presents the findings of the ease of understanding tests for selected business process modelling notations as an element of diagnosing the notations information potential. The easiest-to-understand notation is identified, as well as the attributes determining the choice of this notation as the easiest to understand. Three notations used in business process modelling have been subjected to diagnosis: EPC, BPMS and BPMN. Based on the results of these analyses, recommendations have been formulated for organisations where process modelling requires the involvement of all employees and where process awareness needs to be developed. Using an intuitive notation may contribute to improved communication between users representing different professional profiles and translate into a higher effectiveness of organisational changes.

Keywords

EN

business process modelling; modelling notations; modelling technique; BPMS; BPMN; EPC

• Publisher: Katedra Informatyki Szkoła Główna Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego w Warszawie
• Journal: Information Systems in Management
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 4
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 26-38

Dates

published

2015

Contributors

author

Gabryelczyk Renata

• Faculty of Economic Science, University of Warsaw

author

Jurczuk Arkadiusz

• Faculty of Management, Bialystok University of Technology

References

• Becker J., Schütte R., Geib Th., Ibershoff H. [ed.] (2000) Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Modellierung (GoM), Sachbericht. Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster.
• BOC BPMS Method Handbook: Procedures, Techniques and Modelling Guidelines (2006), ADONIS 3.9 Manuals.
• Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0 (2011), OMG Document Number: formal/2011-01-03, http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0
• Fettke P., Loos P. [ed.] (2007) Reference modeling for business systems analysis, IGI Global.
• Figl K., Laue R. (2011) Cognitive complexity in business process modeling, H. Mouratidis, C. Rolland [ed.]: Advanced Information Systems Engineering, LNCS 6741, Springer, Berlin, 452-466.
• Genero M., Poels G., Piattini M. (2008) Defining and validating metrics for assessing the understandability of entity–relationship diagrams, Data & Knowledge Engineering, 64(3), 534-557.
• Houy C., Fettke P., Loos P. (2012) Understanding Understandability of Conceptual Models – What Are We Actually Talking about?, Conceptual Modeling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Volume 7532, 64-77.
• Houy C., Fettke P., Loos P. (2013) Understanding Understandability of Conceptual Models – What Are We Actually Talking about? Suplement, Publications of the Institute for Information Systems at the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI), Issue 196, 7-15.
• Keller G., Nüttgens M., Scheer A.-W. (1992) Semantische Prozeßmodellierung auf der Grundlage 'Ereignisgesteuerter Prozeßketten (EPK), Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Heft 89, Saarbrücken, http://www.iwi.uni - sb.de/public/iwi -hefte/heft089.zip
• Kock N., Verville J., Danesh-Pajou A., Deluca D. (2009) Communication flow orientation in business process modelling and its effect on redesign success: results from a field study. Decision Support Systems 46, 562-575.
• Krcmar H., Schwarzer B. (1994) Prozeßorientierte Unternehmensmodellierung – Gründe, Anforderungen an Werkzeuge und Folgen für die Organisation, Arbeitspapier Nr. 72, Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Universität Hohenheim, 14-15.
• Ottensooser A., Fekete A., Reijers H.A., Mendling J., Menictas C. (2012) Making sense of business process descriptions: An experimental comparison of graphical and textual notations. Journal of Systems and Software, 85(3), 596-606.
• Recker J., Mendling J. (2007) Adequacy in Process Modeling: A Review of Measures and a Proposed Research Agenda, Proceedings The 19th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'07), 235-244.
• Rosemann M., Schütte R. (1999) Multiperspektivische Referenzmodellierung Becker J., Rosemann M., Schütte R., [ed.] Referenzmodellierung, Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg.
• Rosemann M., Schwegmann A., Delfmann P. (2005) Vorbereitung der Prozessmodellierung, Becker J., Kugeler M., Rosemann M. [ed.]: Prozessmanagement, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 45-57.
• Scheer A.-W. (1998) ARIS – Modellierungsmethoden, Metamodelle, Anwendungen, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
• Scholz R., Vrohlings A. (19940 Prozeß-Struktur-Transparenz, Gaitanides M., Scholz R., Vrohlings A., Raster M. [ed.] Prozeßmanagement, Carl Hanser Verlag München Wien.
• Vessey I. (1991) Cognitive Fit: A Theory-Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature. Decision Science, Volume 22, Issue 2, 219–240.

Identifiers

ISSN

2084-5537