The document discusses the utilization of Business Process Modeling Languages (BPMLs) in South Africa, highlighting gaps between expected and actual BPML capabilities. It identifies three key gaps: usage, expectation, and needs gaps, indicating a lack of understanding and effective use of BPMLs among organizations. The conclusion emphasizes the ineffectiveness of current BPML application and suggests the need for improved training and understanding to maximize their potential.

1. Revealing the
Gaps:
BPML utilisation
in South Africa
John Hill, Lisa F Seymour,
Lunga Silandela
Information Systems
University of Cape Town

2. Revealing the Gaps:
BPML utilisation in South Africa
• BPMLs
• Modelling Tools
• BPML Limitations
• Purpose
• Limitations & Findings
• Conclusion
• Moving Forward

3. Modelling & BPMLs
• This ability to model business processes formally
Transition
Action
is a fundamental part of BPM (business process
management) Transition
• Many business process modelling languages Transition
(BPMLs) and models have been developed such <No op...
as UML AD, Flow Charting, EPC, Petri Nets, Transition
BPMN etc.
• Yet BPML's differ in that they describe or Final state
highlight perspectives differently or to a different
degree [4].

4. Modelling Tools
• A wide range of free/inexpensive tools are available (Aris Express, Transition
Visio, Oryx, etc.) [15] but often lack the support and functionality Action
required for in depth, enterprise wide deployment [16]
Transition
Transition
<No op...
Transition
Final state
Recker [12]

5. Many Tools many BPMLs
Transition
• Many tools support multiple BPMLs. Action
Transition
Transition
<No op...
Transition
Final state

6. Transition
Action
Transition
Transition
<No op...
Transition
Final state

7. BPML Limitations
Transition
• All BPMLs have a shortcoming in that they describe Action
different aspects of business to different extents
• Choosing a BPML that can describe the elements
Transition
(business perspectives) that are important to the Transition
organisation and purpose is vital.
<No op...
Transition
Final state

8. Purpose: “Reveal the Gaps”
Transition
Usage gap: The gap between the elements that can be Action
modelled by an organisation’s chosen BPML and the
elements that are actually modelled by individuals within Transition
that organisation.
Transition
Expectation gap: The gap between the elements that an
<No op...
organisation expects its BPML to model and the
elements which the BPML can actually model. Transition
Needs gap: The number of elements that can’t be modelled
by an organisation’s chosen BPML but are wanted to be Final state
modeled

9. Web Survey
• Modelling purpose • 15 Respondents (60%
• Analyse & Improve 11 SMEs)
• Communicate 11
BPML
• Enactment 2
“Since these types of tools are UML AD
very expensive, not all BPMN
employees have access to it RAD
and VISIO is most often used IDEF3
as the tool to model business EPC
processes.” (Large
Corporation Using UML)

10. Limitations
Transition
• Small Sample Action
• Language constraints vs tool constraints
Transition
• We did not update the List-Korherr evaluation
framework. Transition
• Since their framework was published BPMN 2.0 was released <No op...
with substantial changes.
• UML AD has not undergone substantial recent revisions since v2 Transition
was released in 2005.
Final state

11. A Usage Gap exists
Transition
• The different BPMLs can model between 14 and 32 relevant Action
constructs (elements).
• Yet, on average the usage percentage of the sample was 49%. Transition
• This suggests that almost half the elements that organisations’
Transition
BPMLs can model aren’t being utilised.
• Supports literature [16] <No op...
Transition
Final state

12. An Expectation Gap exists
• We found a lack of understanding with regard to what elements Transition
BPMLs can actually model. Action
• The potential implication of this lack of understanding is the
Transition
implementation of the wrong or unsuitable BPML within an
organisation. Transition
• zur Muehlen & Recker [16] suggest that a lack of training in BPML
<No op...
tool utilisation is to blame for this “expectation gap”
Transition
Final state

13. A Needs Gap exists
• Organisations still require the ability to model more elements Transition
than what their BPMLs can model. Action
• This could be either :
Transition
• a general inability of BPMLs to model certain elements,
• the implementation of unsuitable BPMLs Transition
• or a lack of understanding regarding what elements a given BPML
<No op...
can model
• It has been suggested that a post BPML implementation “needs Transition
gap” arises from a misunderstanding of the non-functional
requirements of a BPML [23]. Final state

14. SMEs vs Large organisations
Transition
• SMEs utilise BPMLs in the same (or similar) way Action
that larger organisations utilise BPMLs Transition
• No association between company size and:
• Unused elements
Transition
<No op...
• Incorrect expectations
Transition
• Needs
Final state

15. Conclusion
Transition
• Brings into question the general suitability of the use of Action
BPMLs in particular, UML AD being employed in South
African organisations to model processes Transition
• South African organisations currently fail to utilise Transition
Business Process Modelling Languages effectively.
<No op...
• A combination of lack of understanding and
shortcomings of BPMLs appear to drive this Transition
ineffectiveness.
Final state

16. Moving Forward
• This evaluation framework for examination of BPML
Transition
utilisation within organisations has the potential to be scaled Action
up once updated.
Transition
• Why do the gaps exist?
• Are the gaps as a result of misrepresentation by vendors of a Transition
BPML’s modelling capability?
<No op...
• Are the gaps as a result of poor/incomplete understanding by
the organisations implementing a BPML? Transition
• Organisations need to realise the full potential of effective
BPML utilisation Final state

17. Transition
Thank you !
Action
Transition
Transition
<No op...
Discussion Transition
Final state