Abstract
Business process modeling is one of the first steps towards achieving organizational goals in the requirements engineering phase. This is why business process modeling quality is an essential aspect for the development and technical support of any company. Modeling experts rely mainly on their personal experience, and the tacit knowledge. In order to help less experienced modelers, many authors have formulated modeling guidelines as a mean to achieve better model quality. Our research goal is to assess the acceptance of these guidelines for teaching purposes through a survey. To achieve this objective we investigate usefulness, ease of use and the intention to use of a collected set of pragmatic guidelines according to the technology acceptance model by means of a survey amongst Cuban PhD students. Results reveal the "best" and "worst" guidelines as perceived by novice modelers. We also witnessed that perceived ease of use has an important influence on the perceived usefulness, and, at the same time, both influence the novice modelers’ intention to use the guidelines. This implies that to ensure usage of the guidelines by junior modelers, they should be understandable and their utility should be well-motivated.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Indulska, M., Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P.: Business process modeling: Current issues and future challenges. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 501–514. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Recker, J.: Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations. Information Systems 35(4), 467–482 (2010)
Bandara, W., Gable, G.G., Rosemann, M.: Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study. European Journal of Information Systems 14(4), 347–360 (2005)
Wand, Y., Weber, R.: Research Commentary: information systems and conceptual modelling—a research agenda. Information Systems Research 13(4), 363–376 (2002)
Davies, I., et al.: How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? Data Knowl. Eng. 58(3), 358–380 (2006)
Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Information and Software Technology 52(2), 127–136 (2010)
Mendling, J., et al.: Thresholds for error probability measures of business process models. Journal of Systems and Software 85(5), 1188–1197 (2012)
Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: What business process modelers can learn from programmers. Science of Computer Programming 65(1), 4–13 (2007)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: A Study Into the Factors That Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models. Ieee Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A 41(3), 449–462 (2011)
Figl, K., Laue, R.: Cognitive complexity in business process modeling. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) CAiSE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6741, pp. 452–466. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Moreno Montes de Oca, I., et al. A systematic literature review of studies on business process modeling quality. Information and Software Technology (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2014.07.011
Nelson, H.J., et al.: A conceptual modeling quality framework. Software Quality Journal 20, 201–228 (2012)
Davis, F.D.: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319–340 (1989)
Lederer, A.L., et al.: The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems 29(3), 269–282 (2000)
Venkatesh, V., et al.: User acceptance of information technology: towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3), 425–478 (2003)
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., Xu, X.: Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Quarterly 36(1), 157–178 (2012)
Moody, D.L.: The method evaluation model: a theoretical model for validating information systems design methods. In: ECIS 2003 (2003)
Riemenschneider, C., Hardgrave, B., Davis, F.: Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of ve theoretical models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(12), 1135–1145 (2002)
Amoako-Gyampah, K.: Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention: an empirical study of ERP implementation. Computers in Human Behavior 23, 1232–1248 (2007)
Turner, M., et al.: Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 52(5), 463–479 (2010)
Weber, B., et al.: Refactoring large process model repositories. Computers in Industry 62(5), 467–486 (2011)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: Modularity in process models: Review and effects. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 20–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.M.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Information Systems 36(5), 881–897 (2011)
Laue, R., Mendling, J.: Structuredness and its significance for correctness of process models. Information Systems and E-Business Management 8(3), 287–307 (2010)
La Rosa, M., et al.: Managing Process Model Complexity via Concrete Syntax Modifications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 7(2), 255–265 (2011)
Abdi, H., Williams, L.J.: Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 2(4), 433–459 (2010)
Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G., Solvberg, A.: Understanding quality in conceptual modeling. IEEE Software 11(2), 42–49 (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Moreno-Montes de Oca, I., Snoeck, M., Casas-Cardoso, G. (2014). A Look into Business Process Modeling Guidelines through the Lens of the Technology Acceptance Model. In: Frank, U., Loucopoulos, P., Pastor, Ó., Petrounias, I. (eds) The Practice of Enterprise Modeling. PoEM 2014. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 197. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45501-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45501-2_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-45500-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-45501-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)