http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

e-VOL BPMN: a technique to support the evolution and learning of BPMN diagrams

e-VOL BPMN: a technique to support the evolution and learning of BPMN diagrams

For access to this article, please select a purchase option:

Buy article PDF
$19.95
(plus tax if applicable)
Buy Knowledge Pack
10 articles for $120.00
(plus taxes if applicable)

IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.

Learn more about IET membership 

Recommend Title Publication to library

You must fill out fields marked with: *

Librarian details
Name:*
Email:*
Your details
Name:*
Email:*
Department:*
Why are you recommending this title?
Select reason:
 
 
 
 
 
IET Software — Recommend this title to your library

Thank you

Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

In the software maintenance, business process models help practitioners understanding of the software, because it represents the organisational process in which software is embedded. BPMN (Business Process Modelling and Notation) is the standard notation for business process modelling. However, it is common for the BPMN diagrams to be outdated, which, among other possibilities, may be caused due to the lack of adequate knowledge of some practitioners about the notation. It is important to provide means to stimulate the evolution of these models and, consequently, to aid in the learning of BPMN notation. With this focus, the authors proposed and evaluated the e-VOL BPMN, a technique that supports the evolution and the learning of BPMN diagrams. In this evaluation, they compared e-VOL BPMN with the BPMN 2.0 Poster, an artefact used commonly to support BPMN notation in companies. Participants who used the e-VOL BPMN in a scenario of diagrams evolution presented more correct BPMN diagrams and had a higher learning perception of the notation. In addition, in a written exam on BPMN notation, participants who used e-VOL BPMN scored higher. From these results, they notice that e-VOL BPMN support both evolution and learning of BPMN diagrams.

References

    1. 1)
      • 1. Bourque, P., Fairley, R.E.: ‘Guide to the software engineering body of knowledge (SWEBOK (R)): version 3.0’ (IEEE Computer Society Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2014).
    2. 2)
      • 2. Mendonça, D.S., da Silva, T.G., de Oliveira, D.F., et al: ‘Applying pattern-driven maintenance: a method to prevent latent unhandled exceptions in web applications’. Proc. of the 12th ACM/IEEE Int. Symp. on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM ‘18), Oulu, Finland, October 2018, pp. 110.
    3. 3)
      • 3. Fernández-Sáez, A., Genero, M., Chaudron, M.: ‘Empirical studies concerning the maintenance of UML diagrams and their use in the maintenance of code: a systematic mapping study’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2013, 55, (7), pp. 11191142.
    4. 4)
      • 4. Sánchez-González, L., Ruiz, F., García, F., et al: ‘Towards thresholds of control flow complexity measures for BPMN models’. Proc. of the 2011 ACM Symp. on Applied Computing (SAC), TaiChung, Taiwan, March 2011, pp. 14451450.
    5. 5)
      • 5. Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., et al: ‘Business process modeling: a comparative analysis’, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 2009, 10, (4), pp. 333363.
    6. 6)
      • 6. Hjalmarsson, A., Recker, J.C., Rosemann, M., et al: ‘Understanding the behavior of workshop facilitators in systems analysis and design projects: developing theory from process modeling projects’, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 2015, 36, (22), pp. 421447.
    7. 7)
      • 7. Bukhsh, Z.A., van Sinderen, M., Sikkel, K., et al: ‘Understanding modeling requirements of unstructured business processes’. Int. Conf. on e-Business (ICE-B), Madrid, Spain, July 2017, pp. 1727.
    8. 8)
      • 8. OMG: ‘Business process model and notation (BPMN). documents associated with BPMN 2.0.2’, Object Management Group, 2014.
    9. 9)
      • 9. Martínez, A., Pastor, O., Estrada, H.: ‘Closing the gap between organizational modeling and information system modeling’. Workshop on Requirements Engineering, Piracicaba-SP, Brazil, November 2003, pp. 93108.
    10. 10)
      • 10. Recker, J.: ‘Opportunities and constraints: the current struggle with BPMN’, Bus. Process Manag. J., 2010, 16, (1), pp. 181201.
    11. 11)
      • 11. Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, P.: ‘Extending representational analysis: BPMN user and developer perspectives’, International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM), Brisbane, Australia, September 2007, pp. 384399.
    12. 12)
      • 12. Lubke, D., Schneider, K., Weidlich, M.: ‘Visualizing use case sets as BPMN processes’. Requirements Engineering Visualization (REV ‘08), Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain, September 2008, pp. 2125.
    13. 13)
      • 13. IEEE, Std 1219 – ‘IEEE Standard for Software Maintenance’, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, NY, USA, 1998.
    14. 14)
      • 14. Recker, J., Dreiling, A.: ‘The effects of content presentation format and user characteristics on novice developers understanding of process models’, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 2011, 28, (6), pp. 6584.
    15. 15)
      • 15. Sánchez-González, L., Ruiz, F., García, F., et al: ‘Towards thresholds of control flow complexity measures for BPMN models’. Proc. of the 2011 ACM Symp. on Applied Computing (SAC), TaiChung, Taiwan, March 2011, pp. 14451450.
    16. 16)
      • 16. Cui, X.: ‘An approach implementing template-based process development on BPMN’. Proc. of the IEEE/ACIS 16th Int. Conf. on Computer and Information Science (ICIS), Wuhan, China, May 2017, pp. 239244.
    17. 17)
      • 17. Aguilar, E.R., Ruiz, F., García, F., et al: ‘Evaluating measures for business process models’. Proc. of the 2006 ACM Symp. on Applied Computing, Dijon, France, April 2006, pp. 15671568.
    18. 18)
      • 18. Yahya, F., Boukadi, K., Ben-Abdallah, H., et al: ‘A fuzzy logic-based approach for assessing the quality of business process models’. Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on Software Technologies (ICSOFT), Madrid, Spain, July 2017, pp. 6172.
    19. 19)
      • 19. Campos, U., Lopes, A., Barbosa, A., et al: ‘Empirical studies concerning the maintenance of bpmn diagrams: a systematic mapping study’. Proc. of the 31st Int. Conf. on Software Engineering & Knowledge Engineering (SEKE 2019), Lisbon, Portugal, July 2019, pp. 325330.
    20. 20)
      • 20. Lopes, A., Oliveira, E., Conte, T., et al: ‘Directives of communicability: towards better communication through software models’. Proc. of the 12th Int. Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE 2019), Montreal, QC, Canada, May 2019, pp. 4548.
    21. 21)
      • 21. De Souza, C.S., Cerqueira, R.D.G., Afonso, L.M., et al: ‘Software developers as users: semiotic investigations in human-centered software development’ (Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2016).
    22. 22)
      • 22. De Mello, R.M., Nogueira, E., Schots, M., et al: ‘Verification of software product line artefacts: a checklist to support feature model inspections’, J. Univers. Comput. Sci., 2014, 20, (5), pp. 720745.
    23. 23)
      • 23. Campos, U., Lopes, A., Oliveira, E., et al: ‘e-VOL BPMN: a technique to support the evolution and learning of BPMN diagrams’, TR-USES-2019-0005, 2019, Available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9750503.v4.
    24. 24)
      • 24. Marques, A., Barbosa, S., Conte, T.: ‘Defining a notation for usability oriented interaction and navigation modeling for interactive systems’, SBC J. Interact. Syst., 2017, 8, (2), pp. 3549.
    25. 25)
      • 25. Kontio, J., Lehtola, L., Bragge, J.: ‘Using the focus group method in software engineering: obtaining practitioner and user experiences’. Proc. 2004 Int. Symp. on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE ‘04), Redondo Beach, CA, USA, August 2004, pp. 271280.
    26. 26)
      • 26. Campos, U., Lopes, A., Oliveira, E., et al: ‘An experimental study to evaluate e-VOL BPMN technique: the material used in the experimental study’, TR-USES-2019-0011, 2019, Available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9759308.v4.
    27. 27)
      • 27. Petri, G., von Wangenheim, C.G., Borgatto, A.F.: ‘MEEGA+, systematic model to evaluate educational games’, in Lee, N. (Eds.): ‘Encyclopedia of computer graphics and games’ (Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2018), pp. 17.
    28. 28)
      • 28. Carver, J., Jaccheri, L., Morasca, S., et al: ‘Issues in using students in empirical studies in software engineering education’. Proc. of the 9th Int. Symp. on Software Metrics, Sydney, NSW, Australia, September 2003, pp. 239249.
    29. 29)
      • 29. Kitchenham, B.A., Pfleeger, S.L., Pickard, L.M., et al: ‘Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering’. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2002, 28, (8), pp. 721734.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2019.0132
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2019.0132
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address