Hajo Reijers        The Processof Process Modeling
Jakob Pinggera      Stefan Zugal    Barbara Weber       Dirk Fahland        Hajo ReijersIrene Vanderfeesten  Matthias Weid...
Process Models in BPM        common              identify problems in        understanding     the business process       ...
Quality Problems Error rates between 10% and 50% in industrial process  model collections (Mendling 2009, Fahland et al. ...
Process Model Development Lifecycle       Elicitation       Formalization                                         PAGE 5
Challenges  Good communication         Significant process  between stakeholders       modeling skills and      and effect...
Overall objective: Improve Formalization1. Learn from process modelers2. Investigate tool/notation impact on modeling3. Su...
Analyze Formalization as a Process                          Formalization        Elicitation            Comprehension     ...
Outline process modeling • motivation • elicitation + formalization capture as a process • conceptual idea • what does i...
Process of Process Modeling (PPM) iterative, highly flexible process depends on individual modeler 3 successive phases ...
What does the PPM look like? same product (process model)                                 PAGE 11
What does the PPM look like? same product (process model) record modeling steps                                 PAGE 12
Model recording                              CREATE_XOR_GATEWAY              CREATE_ACTIVITY                      CREATE_E...
What does the PPM look like? classify modeling steps accumulate in Modeling Phase Diagrams (PPMs)                       ...
Experiments              PAGE 15
Outline process modeling • motivation • elicitation + formalization capture as a process • conceptual idea • what does i...
DIALOGUE DOCUMENT                    PAGE 17
Dialogue documentP.J.M. Frederiks and Th.P. van der Weide: Information modeling: The process and the requiredcompetencies ...
Dialogue document Factor of interest: Organization of dialogue  document Factor levels: Breadth-first, Depth-first, Random
Results: Correctness Very similar                       PAGE 20
Results: Modeling time Breadth-first significantly quicker than random
Results: Accuracy Random has a significant higher distance
Results – Dialogue document Modeling is difficult • High percentage of syntactical errors Organization dialogue document...
MODELING STYLES                  PAGE 24
Modeling styles                  PAGE 25
Approach            Understandable                                                             Non-understandable         ...
Structured modeling Creating blocks ‘as a whole’ (before moving on to  the creation of the rest of the model)            ...
Movement           PAGE 28
Speed        PAGE 29
Test Structured modeling    maxSimulBlock              understandability    0.028*    percNumBlockAsAWhole       underst...
EYE-TRACKING               PAGE 31
Eye-tracking               PAGE 32
Modeler          33
Summary creating a formal model is a process in itself we record and measure this process of modeling modeling is diffi...
Take away good modelers model quickly good modelers model structuredly
The future questions: • can we improve the process of process modeling? • can we develop effective modeling instructions?...
Questions?                                S.N. Cant, D.R. Jeffery and B Henderson-Sellers: A conceptual model of cognitiv...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The process of process modeling by Hajo Reijers

1,171 views

Published on

dr. Hajo Reijers, Associate Professor Business Process Management at Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, "process modeling"

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,171
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
136
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The process of process modeling by Hajo Reijers

  1. 1. Hajo Reijers The Processof Process Modeling
  2. 2. Jakob Pinggera Stefan Zugal Barbara Weber Dirk Fahland Hajo ReijersIrene Vanderfeesten Matthias Weidlich Jan Mendling Pnina Soffer Jan Claes Geert Poels PAGE 2
  3. 3. Process Models in BPM common identify problems in understanding the business process discover opportunities execute for improvement PAGE 3
  4. 4. Quality Problems Error rates between 10% and 50% in industrial process model collections (Mendling 2009, Fahland et al. 2009, Mendling et al. 2008) impedes comprehensibility and maintainability of process models (Mendling 2008, Weber & Reichert 2008, Weber et al. 2011) • Non intention-revealing or inconsistent naming (Mendling et al. 2010) • Redundant process fragments (Hallerbach et al. 2010) • Large and unnecessarily complex process models (Soto et al. 2008) PAGE 4
  5. 5. Process Model Development Lifecycle Elicitation Formalization PAGE 5
  6. 6. Challenges Good communication Significant process between stakeholders modeling skills and and effective good modeling negotiation processes support Elicitation Formalization PAGE 6
  7. 7. Overall objective: Improve Formalization1. Learn from process modelers2. Investigate tool/notation impact on modeling3. Support modeling: • modeling methodology • modeling notation • modeling tools Elicitation Formalization PAGE 7
  8. 8. Analyze Formalization as a Process Formalization Elicitation Comprehension Reconciliation Modeling PAGE 8
  9. 9. Outline process modeling • motivation • elicitation + formalization capture as a process • conceptual idea • what does it look like insights: • dialogue document • modeling styles • eye-tracking PAGE 9
  10. 10. Process of Process Modeling (PPM) iterative, highly flexible process depends on individual modeler 3 successive phases Comprehension Reconciliation Modeling PAGE 10
  11. 11. What does the PPM look like? same product (process model) PAGE 11
  12. 12. What does the PPM look like? same product (process model) record modeling steps PAGE 12
  13. 13. Model recording CREATE_XOR_GATEWAY CREATE_ACTIVITY CREATE_EDGECREATE_START_EVENT CREATE_AND_GATEWA MOVE_ACTIVITYDELETE_ACTIVITY NAME_EDGE CREATE_EDGE_BENDPOINT RENAME_ACTIVITYCheetah Experimental Platform: http://bpm.q-e.at/?page_id=56 PAGE 13
  14. 14. What does the PPM look like? classify modeling steps accumulate in Modeling Phase Diagrams (PPMs) PAGE 14
  15. 15. Experiments PAGE 15
  16. 16. Outline process modeling • motivation • elicitation + formalization capture as a process • conceptual idea • what does it look like some insights • dialogue document • attention fixation • modeling styles PAGE 16
  17. 17. DIALOGUE DOCUMENT PAGE 17
  18. 18. Dialogue documentP.J.M. Frederiks and Th.P. van der Weide: Information modeling: The process and the requiredcompetencies of its participants. Data and Knowledge Engineering 58 (2006) 1, 4-20. PAGE 18
  19. 19. Dialogue document Factor of interest: Organization of dialogue document Factor levels: Breadth-first, Depth-first, Random
  20. 20. Results: Correctness Very similar PAGE 20
  21. 21. Results: Modeling time Breadth-first significantly quicker than random
  22. 22. Results: Accuracy Random has a significant higher distance
  23. 23. Results – Dialogue document Modeling is difficult • High percentage of syntactical errors Organization dialogue document: • Limited effect on syntactical correctness • Big effect on accuracy Breadth first seems favorable: • Modeling time lowest • Modelers most closely follow dialogue document PAGE 23
  24. 24. MODELING STYLES PAGE 24
  25. 25. Modeling styles PAGE 25
  26. 26. Approach Understandable Non-understandable models models J. Claes, I. Vanderfeesten, H.A. Reijers, J. Pinggera, M. Weidlich, S. Zugal, B. Weber, J. Mendling, G. Poels and D. Fahland. Tying Process Model Quality to the Modeling Process: The Impact of Structuring, Movement, and Speed. Accepted to 10th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2012) PAGE 26
  27. 27. Structured modeling Creating blocks ‘as a whole’ (before moving on to the creation of the rest of the model) ACT ACT X X ACT PAGE 27
  28. 28. Movement PAGE 28
  29. 29. Speed PAGE 29
  30. 30. Test Structured modeling maxSimulBlock understandability  0.028* percNumBlockAsAWhole understandability  0.030* Moves avgMoveOnMovedElements understandability  0.049* percNumElementsWithMoves understandability  0.648 Speed totTime understandability  0.031* totCreateTime understandability  0.014* PAGE 30
  31. 31. EYE-TRACKING PAGE 31
  32. 32. Eye-tracking PAGE 32
  33. 33. Modeler 33
  34. 34. Summary creating a formal model is a process in itself we record and measure this process of modeling modeling is difficult structure dialogue document has an impact modeling styles differ – relation with model quality in search of what makes modeling difficult PAGE 34
  35. 35. Take away good modelers model quickly good modelers model structuredly
  36. 36. The future questions: • can we improve the process of process modeling? • can we develop effective modeling instructions? • can we provide effective tool support? X X PAGE 36
  37. 37. Questions?  S.N. Cant, D.R. Jeffery and B Henderson-Sellers: A conceptual model of cognitive complexity of elements of the programming process. Information and Software Technology 37 (1995) 7, pp. 351-362.  J. Claes, I. Vanderfeesten, H.A. Reijers, J. Pinggera, M. Weidlich, S. Zugal, B. Weber, J. Mendling, G. Poels and D. Fahland. Tying Process Model Quality to the Modeling Process: The Impact of Structuring, Movement, and Speed. Accepted to 10th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2012)  P.J.M. Frederiks and Th.P. van der Weide: Information modeling: The process and the required competencies of its participants. Data and Knowledge Engineering 58 (2006) 1, 4-20.  A. Hallerbach, T. Bauer and M. Reichert: Capturing Variability in Business Process Models: The Provop Approach. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 22 (2010) 6–7, pp. 519–546.  J. Mendling: Metrics for Process Models: Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction and Guidelines for Correctness, Springer, 2008.  J. Mendling: Empirical Studies in Process Model Verification. Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II, Springer, 2009, pp. 208–224.  G. Miller: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review 63 (1956), pp. 81-87.  J. Mendling, H.A. Reijers and J. Recker, Activity Labeling in Process Modeling: Empirical Insights and Recommendations, Information Systems 35 (2010) 4, pp. 467-482.  J. Mendling, H.M.W. Verbeek, B.F. van Dongen, W.M.P. van der Aalst and G. Neumann: Detection and Prediction of Errors in EPCs of the SAP Reference Model, Data & Knowledge Engineering 64 (2008) 1, pp. 312-329.  J. Pinggera, P. Soffer, S. Zugal, B. Weber, M. Weidlich, D. Fahland, H.A. Reijers and J. Mendling: Modeling Styles in Business Process Modeling. In: Proc. BPMDS ’12 (accepted), 2012. Hajo Reijers  P. Rittgen, Quality and perceived usefulness of process models, In: Proc. SAC’10, 2010, pp. 65- h.a.reijers@tue.nl 72.  A.-W. Scheer, ARIS - Business Process Modeling, 3rd ed., Springer 2000.  M. Soto, A. Ocampo and J. Munch: The Secret Life of a Process Description: A Look into the http://www.reijers.com Evolution of a Large Process Model, In: Proc. ICSP08, 2008, pp. 257-268. Twitter: @MultumNonMulta  B. Weber and M. Reichert: Refactoring Process Models in Large Process Repositories In: Proc. CAiSE08 (2008), pp. 124-139.  B. Weber, M. Reichert, J. Mendling and H.A. Reijers: Refactoring Large Process Model Repositories.. Computers and Industry 62(2011) 5, pp. 467-486. PAGE 37

×