Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Role and Application of OMG Notations in IT: Analysis and Survey on the Effectiveness of Business Notations Among IT Companies in Poland

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Business Process Management: Blockchain, Robotic Process Automation, Central and Eastern European, Educators and Industry Forum (BPM 2024)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 527))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 573 Accesses

Abstract

This study analyzes OMG (Object Management Group) notations, their capabilities, and potential drawbacks. It includes a literature review and a survey focused on the purpose of using OMG models in the IT sector. Conducted via CAWI (Computer Assisted Web Interview) with 160 respondents from Polish IT companies, the survey aimed to identify which OMG notations are used, their practical applications, creation sequences, and the impact of job roles. The results confirmed the objective of validating the purposeful use of various notations. The survey established relationships and justified the use of specific models by Polish IT professionals with different job profiles. It highlighted the diverse perspectives needed in software development, depending on the role within the project. The survey also identified the most commonly used platforms for designing models with OMG notations and revealed that there is no universal modeling tool suitable for all stages of the process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. OMG. Unified Modeling Language ver. 2.5.1. https://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.5.1/PDF, OMG Document Number: 2017-12-05 (2017)

  2. Dobing, B., Parsons, J.: How UML is used. Commun. ACM 49(5), 109–113 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Grossman, M., Aronson, J.E., McCarthy, R.V.: Does UML make the grade? insights from the software development community. Inf. Softw. Technol. 47(6), 383–397 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Langer, P., Mayerhofer, T., Wimmer, M., Kappel, G. On the usage of UML: initial results of analyzing open UML models. In: Fill, H., Ulrich Reimer, D.K. (eds.) Modellierung 2014, pp. 19–21 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Reggio, G., Leotta, M., Ricca, F.: Who knows/uses what of the UML: a personal opinion survey. In: Dingel, J., Schulte, W., Ramos, I., Abrahão, S., Insfran, E. (eds.) MODELS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8767, pp. 149–165. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11653-2_10

  6. Scanniello, G., Gravino, C., Tortora, G.: Investigating the role of UML in the software modeling and maintenance - a preliminary industrial survey. In: Filipe, J., Cordeiro, J. (eds.) ICEIS 2010, pp. 141–148. SciTePress (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ambler, S.W.: UML 2.5: Do you even care? (2013). https://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/uml-25-do-you-even-care/240163702#disqus_thread

  8. Cabot, J.: What do their creators think about UML now? Modeling Languages (2018). https://modeling-languages.com/uml-opinions-creators/

  9. Cabot, J.: Grady Booch’s comments on UML/MDA and software engineering. Modeling Languages (2009). https://modeling-languages.com/grady-boochs-comments-umlmda/

  10. Störrle, H.: How are conceptual models used in industrial software development? A descriptive survey. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE 2017 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Petre, M. UML in practice. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2013, pp. 722–731. IEEE Press (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Petre, M.: “No shit” or “Oh, shit!”: responses to observations on the use of UML in professional practice. Softw. Syst. Model. 13, 1225–1235 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Selic, B.: The pragmatics of model-driven development. IEEE Softw. 20(5), 19–25 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dobing, B., Parsons, J.: Dimensions of UML diagram use: a survey of practitioners. J. Database Manag. (JDM) 19(1), 1–18 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Reggio, G., Leotta, M., Ricca, F., Clerissi, D.: What are the used activity diagram constructs? - a survey. In: Pires, L.F., Hammoudi, S., Filipe, J., das Neves, R.C. (eds.) MODELSWARD 2014, pp. 87–98. SciTePress (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Budgen, D., Burn, A.J., Brereton, O.P., Kitchenham, B.A., Pretorius, R.: Empirical evidence about the UML: a systematic literature review. Softw.—Pract. Exp. 41, 363–392 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Baltes, S., Diehl, S.: Sketches and diagrams in practice. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 530–541 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Gallo, S.: How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? Data Knowl. Eng. 58(3), 358–380 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Forward, A., Lethbridge, T.C.: Problems and opportunities for model-centric versus code-centric software development: a survey of software professionals. In: MiSE 2008, pp. 27–32. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lange, C., Chaudron, M., Muskens, J.: UML software architecture and design description. IEEE Softw. 23(2), 40–46 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nugroho, A., Chaudron, M.R.V.: A survey into the rigor of UML use and its perceived impact on quality and productivity. In: Rombach, H.D., Elbaum, S.G., Münch, J. (eds.) ESEM 2008, pp. 90–99. ACM (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fernández-Sáez, A.M., Chaudron, M., Genero, M.: An industrial case study on the use of UML in software maintenance and its perceived benefits and hurdles. Empir. Softw. Eng. 23, 3281–3345 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fernández-Sáez, A.M., Genero, M., Chaudron, M.R.: Empirical studies concerning the maintenance of UML diagrams and their use in the maintenance of code: a systematic mapping study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(7), 1119–1142 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Farias, K., Gonçales, L., Bischoff, V., Silva, B., Guimarães, E.T., Nogle, J.: On the UML use in the Brazilian industry: a state of the practice survey. In: SEKE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ozkaya, M., Erata, F.: A survey on the practical use of UML for different software architecture viewpoints. Inf. Softw. Technol. 121 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Zyła, K., Ulidowski, A., Wrzos, J., Włodarczyk, B., Krocz, K., Drozd, P.: UML – a survey on technical university students in Lublin. J. Comput. Sci. Inst. 13, 279–282 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. OMG. UML vendor directory listing (2021). https://www.omg.org/uml-directory/vendor/list.htm

  28. Modeling Languages. Top online UML modeling tools in 2019 (2019). https://modeling-languages.com/web-based-modeling-tools-uml-er-bpmn/

  29. Cabot, J. Modeling, low-code tools (2019). https://twitter.com/i/lists/744723693801209856

  30. Cabot, J., 25 best UML tools free UML diagram software in 2021 (2021). https://www.guru99.com/best-uml-tools.html

  31. Modeling Languages.com. Curated list of UML tools – 2022 edition (2022). https://modeling-languages.com/uml-tools/

  32. Thong, W.J., Ameedeen, M.A.: A survey of UML tools. In: Abawajy, J., Othman, M., Ghazali, R., Deris, M., Mahdin, H., Herawan, T. (eds.) DaEng-2015. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol. 520, pp. 61–70. Springer, Singapore (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1799-6_7

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cracow University of Technology, ul. Warszawska 24, 31-155, Kraków, Poland

    Anna Suchenia & Karol Suchenia

  2. AGH University of Krakow, al. A. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059, Krakow, Poland

    Mateusz Ślażyński

  3. Department of Mathematics, Informatics and Cybernetics, Faculty of Chemical Engineering, University of Chemistry and Technology, Technicka 5, 166 28, Prague 6, Prague, Czech Republic

    Leszek Szała

Authors
  1. Anna Suchenia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karol Suchenia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mateusz Ślażyński
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leszek Szała
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Suchenia .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Claudio Di Ciccio

  2. University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Walid Fdhila

  3. Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Simone Agostinelli

  4. University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Daniel Amyot

  5. Kühne Logistics University, Hamburg, Germany

    Henrik Leopold

  6. Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic

    Michal Krčál

  7. TU Wien, Vienna, Austria

    Monika Malinova Mandelburger

  8. University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

    Gregor Polančič

  9. University of Zagreb, Varaždin, Croatia

    Katarina Tomičić-Pupek

  10. AGH University of Krakow, Kraków, Poland

    Katarzyna Gdowska

  11. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Thomas Grisold

  12. University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland

    Piotr Sliż

  13. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Iris Beerepoot

  14. University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Renata Gabryelczyk

  15. University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Ralf Plattfaut

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Suchenia, A., Suchenia, K., Ślażyński, M., Szała, L. (2024). Role and Application of OMG Notations in IT: Analysis and Survey on the Effectiveness of Business Notations Among IT Companies in Poland. In: Di Ciccio, C., et al. Business Process Management: Blockchain, Robotic Process Automation, Central and Eastern European, Educators and Industry Forum. BPM 2024. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 527. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70445-1_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70445-1_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-70444-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-70445-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics