Reducing the cognitive complexity of business process models

Proceedings of the 2009 8th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, ICCI 2009

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 339-345

  Gruhn, Volker ^a   Laue, Ralf ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Business process models; Cognitive complexity

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS PROCESS MODEL; BUSINESS PROCESS MODELS; COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY; COGNITIVE LOADS; PROCESS MODEL; UNDERSTANDABILITY;

ONLINE SEARCHING;

PROCESS MONITORING;

EID: 70449435294     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/COGINF.2009.5250717     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. S. W. Ambler. The Elements of UML Style. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
2. A. Awad. BPMN-Q: A language to query business processes. In M. Reichert, S. Strecker, and K. Turowski, editors, EMISA, volume P-119 of LNI, Pages 115-128. GI, 2007.
3. J. Becker, M. Rosemann, and C. v. Uthmann. Guidelines of business process modeling. In Business Process Management, Models, Techniques, and Empirical Studies, Pages 30-49, London, UK, 2000. Springer-Verlag.
4. Business Process Management Initiative. Business Process Modeling Notation. Technical report, BPMI.org, 2004.
5. J. Cardoso. How to measure the control-flow complexity of web processes and workflows. In The Workflow Handbook, Pages 199-212, 2005.
6. J. Cardoso, J. Mendling, G. Neumann, and H. Reijers. A discourse on complexity of process models. In Proceedings of the BPM2006 Workshops, Workshop on Business Process Design BPI2006, Vienna, Austria, 2006.
7. R. Dijkman, M. Dumas, and C. Ouyang. Formal semantics and automated analysis of BPMN process models. Technical Report Preprint 7115, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 2007.
8. D. E. Egan and B. J. Schwartz. Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings. Memory & Cognition, 7(2):149-158, 1979.
9. V. R. Gibson and J. A. Senn. System structure and software maintenance performance. Commun. ACM, 32(3):347-358, 1989.
10. V. Gruhn and R. Laue. Complexity metrics for business process models. In 9th International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS 2006), Klagenfurt, Austria, 2006.
11. V. Gruhn and R. Laue. Checking properties of business process models with logic programming. In J. C. Augusto, J. Barjis, and U. Ultes-Nitsche, editors, MSWEIS, Pages 84-93. INSTICC Press, 2007.
12. V. Gruhn and R. Laue. Good and bad excuses for unstructured business process models. In Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP 2007), 2007.
13. J. Koehler and J. Vanhatalo. Process anti-patterns: How to avoid the common traps of business process modeling, part 1 - modelling control flow. IBM Web Sphere Developer Technical Journal, (10.4.), April 2007.
14. S. Kiihne, H. Kern, V. Gruhn, and R. Laue. Business process modelling with continuous validation. In C. Pautasso and J. Koehler, editors, MDE4BPM 2008 1st International Workshop on Model-Driven Engineering for Business Process Management, 2008.
15. R. Laue and J. Mendling. The impact of structuredness on error probability of process models. In R. Kaschek, C. Kop, C. Steinberger, and G. Fliedl, editors, UNISCON, volume 5 of Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Pages 585-590. Springer, 2008.
16. J. Melcher and D. Seese. Towards validating prediction systems for process understandability: Measuring process understandability (experimental results). Technical report, Universitat Karlsruhe (TH), Institut fiir Angewandte Informatik und Formale Beschreibungsverfahren, August 2008.
17. J. Mendling. Detection and Prediction of Errors in EPC Business Process Models. PhD thesis, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, 2007.
18. J. Mendling, H. A. Reijers, and J. Cardoso. What makes process models understandable? In G. Alonso, P. Dadam, and M. Rosemann, editors, BPM, volume 4714 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Pages 48-63. Springer, 2007.
19. J. Mendling, H. A. Reijers, and W. M. van der Aalst. Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Technical Report QUTe Prints, Report 12340, Queensland University of Technology, 2008.
20. J. Mendling and M. Strembeck. Influence factors of understanding business process models. In D. F. Witold Abramowicz, editor, Business Information Systems, 11th International Conference, BIS 2008, Innsbruck, Austria, May 2008, Pages 142-153. Springer-Verlag, 2008.
21. D. L. Moody. Cognitive load effects on end user understanding of conceptual models: An experimental analysis. In G. Gottlob, A. A. Benczur, and J. Demetrovics, editors, Proceedings of8th East European Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems, ADBIS 2004, LNCS 3255, Pages 129-143, Budapest, Hungary, September 2004. Springer. 22-25.
22. C. Ouyang, M. Dumas, W. M. van der Aalst, and A. H. ter Hofstede. From business process models to process-oriented software systems: The BPMN to BPEL way. Technical Report BPM-06-27, BPM Center Report, BPMcenter.org, 2006.
23. J. E. Robbins and D. F. Redmiles. Cognitive support, UML adherence, and XMI interchange in Argo/UML. Information & Software Technology, 42(2):79-89, 2000.
24. H. D. Rombach. A controlled experiment on the impact of software structure on maintainability. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 13(3):344-354, 1987.
25. T. Rozman, G. Polancic, and R. V. Horvat. Analysis of Most Common Process Modeling Mistakes in BPMN Process Models. 2008.
26. F. J. Rump. Geschäftsprozeβmanagement auf der Basis ereignisgesteuerter Prozejβketten. B. G. Teubner Verlag Stuttgart Leipzig, 1999.
27. K. Sarshar and P. Loos. Comparing the control-flow of EPC and Petri net from the end-user perspective. In Business Process Management, Pages 434-439, 2005.
28. G. Smith. Improving process model quality to drive BPM project success. http://www.bpm.com/improving-processmodel-quality-to-drive-bpm-project-success. html, 2008. [Online; accessed 01-November-2008].
29. J. Sweller. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4):295-312, 1994.
30. W. M. van der Aalst. Structural characterizations of sound workflow nets. Computing Science Reports/23, (96), 1996.
31. W. M. van der Aalst. Verification of workflow nets. In P. Azema and G. Balbo, editors, Application and Theory of Petri Nets 1997, 18th International Conference, ICATPN '97, Toulouse, France, June 23-27, 1997, Proceedings, Pages 407-426, 1997.
32. W. M. van der Aalst. Formalization and verification of eventdriven process chains. Information & Software Technology, 41(10):639-650, 1999.
33. I. T. P. Vanderfeesten, H. A. Reijers, J. Mendling, W. M. van der Aalst, and J. Cardoso. On a quest for good process models: The cross-connectivity metric. In Z. Bellahsene and M. Leonard, editors, CAiSE, volume 5074 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Pages 480-494. Springer, 2008.
34. M. T. Wynn, H. Verbeek, W. M. van der Aalst, and D. Edmond. Business process verification - finally a reality! Business Process Management Journal, 15(1):74-92.