nach oben

Erschienen in:

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Business Process and Rule Integration Approaches - An Empirical Analysis

verfasst von : Tianwa Chen, Wei Wang, Marta Indulska, Shazia Sadiq

Erschienen in: Business Process Management Forum

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Modeling landscapes in organizations suffer from the problem of information silos, where a number of process models, business rule repositories and other information artefacts may exist concurrently for the same business activity. In this paper, we investigate integrating business process models and business rules. Prior literature presents three such approaches, namely text annotation, diagrammatic, and link integration. We evaluate these approaches from a cognitive load perspective and measure the value of integration from three perspectives: understanding accuracy, mental effort and time efficiency. Our results indicate that diagrammatic integration is associated with better understanding accuracy than text annotation and link integration, but may require more mental effort and time under certain conditions. We also found that the integration approach partially influences mental effort and time efficiency. Further insights from our empirical analysis reveal relationships between process model constructs, integration approaches and cognitive load, especially how approaches applied to models with specific characteristics, impact on process understanding and cognitive load.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel A Logical Formalization of Time-Critical Processes with Resources

Nächstes Kapitel Business Process Activity Relationships: Is There Anything Beyond Arrows?

For more specifications of eye tracker, please visit https://www.tobiipro.com/product-listing/tobii-pro-tx300/.

Model originated from a travel booking diagram in OMG’s BPMN 2.0 examples can be viewed in http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?dtc/10-06-02.

Model adopted from Signavio website can be viewed in https://www.signavio.com/post/process-thinking-insurance/.

The experiment materials can be download from https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eiow8c3z6u4vx7w/AACm44dstgRm2KRLJBRzwF8Na?dl=0.

The Shapiro-Wilk test is a test of normality.

Levene’s test is an inferential statistic used to assess the equality of variances for a variable calculated for two or more groups.

Tukey’s HSD is a post-hoc analysis of ANOVA that can be used to find means that are significantly different from each other.

Kruskal-Wallis test is a non-parametric method when there are more than two groups.

Dunn’s test is a non-parametric multiple comparison post-hoc test of Kruskal-Wallis test.

Burton-Jones, A., Meso, P.N.: Conceptualizing systems for understanding: an empirical test of decomposition principles in object-oriented analysis. Inf. Syst. Res. 17, 38–60 (2006)CrossRef

Chen, F., et al.: Robust Multimodal Cognitive Load Measurement. HIS. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31700-7CrossRef

Cheng, R., Sadiq, S., Indulska, M.: Framework for business process and rule integration: a case of BPMN and SBVR. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2011. LNBIP, vol. 87, pp. 13–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21863-7_2CrossRef

Duchowski, A.T.: Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice. Springer, London (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-609-4CrossRef

Figl, K., Laue, R.: Influence factors for local comprehensibility of process models. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 82, 96–110 (2015)CrossRef

Gemino, A., Wand, Y.: A framework for empirical evaluation of conceptual modeling techniques. Requir. Eng. 9(4), 248–260 (2004)CrossRef

Governatori, G., Shek, S.: Rule based business process compliance. In: Proceedings of the RuleML2012@ ECAI Challenge, article 5 (2012)

Green, P.F., Rosemann, M.: Perceived ontological weaknesses of process modeling techniques: further evidence. In: Proceedings of the ECIS, pp. 312–321 (2002)

Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Adopting the cognitive complexity measure for business process models. In: 5th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics (ICCI 2006), Beijing, China (2006)

10.

Haji, F.A., Rojas, D., Childs, R., de Ribaupierre, S., Dubrowski, A.: Measuring cognitive load: performance, mental effort and simulation task complexity. Med. Educ. 49, 815–827 (2015)CrossRef

11.

Hogrebe, F., Gehrke, N., Nüttgens, M.: Eye tracking experiments in business process modeling: agenda setting and proof of concept. In: Proceedings of EMISA 2011, pp. 183–188 (2011)

12.

Just, M.A., Carpenter, P.A.: Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cogn. Psychol. 8, 441–480 (1976)CrossRef

13.

Kappel, G., Rausch-Schott, S., Retschitzegger, W.: Coordination in workflow management systems — a rule-based approach. In: Conen, W., Neumann, G. (eds.) ASIAN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1364, pp. 99–119. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0027102CrossRef

14.

Knolmayer, G., Endl, R., Pfahrer, M.: Modeling processes and workflows by business rules. In: van der Aalst, W., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 16–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45594-9_2CrossRef

15.

McBrien, P., Seltveit, A.H.: Coupling process models and business rules. In: Sölvberg, A., Krogstie, J., Seltveit, A.H. (eds.) Information Systems Development for Decentralized Organizations. ITIFIP, pp. 201–217. Springer, Boston (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34871-1_12CrossRef

16.

Meghanathan, R.N., van Leeuwen, C., Nikolaev, A.R.: Fixation duration surpasses pupil size as a measure of memory load in free viewing. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 1063 (2015)CrossRef

17.

Melcher, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Seese, D.: On measuring the understandability of process models. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Sadiq, S., Leymann, F. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNBIP, vol. 43, pp. 465–476. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12186-9_44CrossRef

18.

Melcher, J., Seese, D.: Towards validating prediction systems for process understandability: measuring process understandability (experimental results). Research report, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Institut AIFB (2008)

19.

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). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_4CrossRef

20.

Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inf. Softw. Technol. 52, 127–136 (2010)CrossRef

21.

Mendling, J., Strembeck, M.: Influence factors of understanding business process models. In: Abramowicz, W., Fensel, D. (eds.) BIS 2008. LNBIP, vol. 7, pp. 142–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79396-0_13CrossRef

22.

Mendling, J., Strembeck, M., Recker, J.: Factors of process model comprehension—findings from a series of experiments. Decis. Support Syst. 53, 195–206 (2012)CrossRef

23.

Paas, F., Tuovinen, J.E., Tabbers, H., Van Gerven, P.W.M.: Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educ. Psychol. 38, 63–71 (2003)CrossRef

24.

Petrusel, R., Mendling, J.: Eye-tracking the factors of process model comprehension tasks. In: Salinesi, C., Norrie, M.C., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) CAiSE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7908, pp. 224–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38709-8_15CrossRef

25.

Petrusel, R., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Task-specific visual cues for improving process model understanding. Inf. Softw. Technol. 79, 63–78 (2016)CrossRef

26.

Recker, J.: Empirical investigation of the usefulness of Gateway constructs in process models. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22, 673–689 (2012)CrossRef

27.

Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P.F., Indulska, M.: Do ontological deficiencies in modeling grammars matter? MIS Q. 35, 57–79 (2011)CrossRef

28.

Reijers, H., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Inf. Syst. 36, 881–897 (2011)CrossRef

29.

Rima, A., Vasilecas, O., Šmaižys, A.: Comparative analysis of business rules and business process modeling languages. Comput. Sci. Tech. 1(1), 52–60 (2013)CrossRef

30.

Rolón, E., Garcia, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., Visaggio, C.A., Canfora, G.: Evaluation of BPMN models quality - a family of experiments. In: ENASE, pp. 56–63 (2008)

31.

Sánchez-González, L., García, F., Mendling, J., Ruiz, F.: Quality assessment of business process models based on thresholds. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6426, pp. 78–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16934-2_9CrossRef

32.

Sapkota, B., van Sinderen, M.: Exploiting rules and processes for increasing flexibility in service composition. In: 2010 14th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW), pp. 177–185. IEEE (2010)

33.

Turetken, O., Rompen, T., Vanderfeesten, I., Dikici, A., van Moll, J.: The effect of modularity representation and presentation medium on the understandability of business process models in BPMN. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 289–307. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_17CrossRef

34.

Wang, W., Indulska, M., Sadiq, S.: Cognitive efforts in using integrated models of business processes and rules - semantic scholar. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE Workshop), Ljubljana, Slovenia. Springer (2016)

35.

Wang, W., Indulska, M., Sadiq, S.: To integrate or not to integrate – the business rules question. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9694, pp. 51–66. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_4CrossRef

36.

Wang, W., Indulska, M., Sadiq, S., Weber, B.: Effect of linked rules on business process model understanding. In: Carmona, J., Engels, G., Kumar, A. (eds.) BPM 2017. LNCS, vol. 10445, pp. 200–215. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65000-5_12CrossRef

37.

Weitlaner, D., Guettinger, A., Kohlbacher, M.: Intuitive comprehensibility of process models. In: Fischer, H., Schneeberger, J. (eds.) S-BPM ONE 2013. CCIS, vol. 360, pp. 52–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36754-0_4CrossRef

38.

Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Assessing the impact of hierarchy on model understandability – a cognitive perspective. In: Kienzle, J. (ed.) MODELS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7167, pp. 123–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29645-1_14CrossRef

39.

Zur Muehlen, M., Indulska, M., Kittel, K.: Towards integrated modeling of business processes and business rules. In: Proceedings of the 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS)-Creating the Future: Transforming Research into Practice, Christchurch, New Zealand, pp. 690–697. Citeseer (2008)

Titel: Business Process and Rule Integration Approaches - An Empirical Analysis
verfasst von: Tianwa Chen
Wei Wang
Marta Indulska
Shazia Sadiq
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Business Process Management Forum
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98650-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-98651-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98651-7_3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner