Zusammenfassung
Die Verfügbarkeit qualitativ hochwertiger Geschäftsprozessmodelle gilt als eine zentrale Voraussetzung für ein erfolgreiches Prozessmanagement. In der Praxis zeigen Prozessmodelle dennoch eine Vielzahl von Qualitätsdefiziten, darunter sprachliche, inhaltliche und stilistische Mängel. Darüber hinaus finden sich kaum Ansätze, mit denen die Qualität von Geschäftsprozessmodellen bestimmt werden kann. Im Beitrag wird mit dem 3QM-Framework ein analytischer Ansatz vorgestellt, mit dem sich die Qualität von Geschäftsprozessmodellen systematisch bestimmen lässt. Das 3QM-Framework leistet hierzu drei Beiträge: es stellt Qualitätsmerkmale, -metriken und -messverfahren zur Quantifizierung des Qualitätsniveaus als Elemente eines theoretisch begründeten Qualitätsmodells bereit. Die Anwendbarkeit des 3QM-Frameworks wurde im Rahmen von Fallstudien empirisch überprüft. Die Ergebnisse einer Expertenbefragung bestätigen darüber hinaus seine praktische Relevanz.
Abstract
The availability of high-quality business process models is a central prerequisite for a successful process management. Nevertheless, in practice process models exhibit a large number of quality deficits, among them grammatical, content-related, and stylistic defects. In addition, there exist only very few approaches to determine the quality of business process models. In this paper, we present the 3QM-Framework, an analytical approach to systematically determine the quality of business process models. The 3QM-Framework makes three contributions: it provides quality marks, metrics, and measurement procedures to quantify the quality level as elements of a theoretically justified quality model. The applicability of the 3QM-Framework has been empirically evaluated in case studies. The results of a survey that was conducted among experts moreover attest its practical relevance.
Notes
Die Unterlagen zur Expertenbefragung befinden sich im Online-Anhang.
Literatur
Aczél J, Saaty TL (1983) Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27(1):93–102
Balzert H (2008) Lehrbuch der Softwaretechnik, Band 2, Softwaremanagement, 2. Aufl. Spektrum, Heidelberg
Becker J (2011) Geschäftsprozessmodellierung. In: Kurbel K, Becker J, Gronau N, Sinz E, Suhl L (Hrsg) Enzyklopädie der Wirtschaftsinformatik – Online-Lexikon, 5. Aufl. Oldenbourg, München
Becker J, Schütte R (2004) Handelsinformationssysteme, 2. Aufl. Verlag Moderne Industrie, Frankfurt
Becker J, Rosemann M, Schütte R (1995) Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Modellierung. Wirtschaftsinformatik 37(5):435–445
Becker J, Rosemann M, von Uthmann C (2000) Guidelines of business process modeling. In: Proc business process management conference. Lect Notes Comput Sci, Bd 1806. Springer, Berlin, S 30–49
Birkmeier DQ, Klöckner S, Overhage S (2010) An empirical comparison of the usability of BPMN and UML activity diagrams for business users. In: Proc 18th European conference on information systems, Pretoria
Burton-Jones A, Wand Y, Weber R (2009) Guidelines for empirical evaluations of conceptual modeling grammars. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 10(6):495–532
Delfmann P, Herwig S, Lis L (2009) Unified enterprise knowledge representation with conceptual models – capturing corporate language in naming conventions. In: Proc 30th international conference on information systems, Phoenix
Denger C, Olsson T (2005) Quality assurance in requirements engineering. In: Aurum A, Wohlin C (Hrsg) Engineering and managing software requirements. Springer, Berlin, S 163–186
Fellmann M, Hogrebe F, Thomas O, Nüttgens M (2011) Checking the semantic correctness of process models. Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures 6(3):25–35
Gemino A, Wand Y (2004) A framework for empirical evaluation of conceptual modeling techniques. Requirements Engineering 9(3):153–168
Given LM (2008) The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage, Los Angeles
Hadar I, Soffer P (2006) Variations in conceptual modeling: classification and ontological analysis. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 7(8):569–593
Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. Management Information Systems Quarterly 28(1):75–105
Iivari J (2007) A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2):39–64
Indulska M, Recker J, Rosemann M, Green PF (2008) Representational deficiency of process modelling languages: measures and implications. In: Proc 16th European conference on information systems. Galway, Ireland
ISO/IEC (2000) Quality management systems: fundamentals and vocabulary. ISO/IEC 9000-2000, International Organization for Standardization
ISO/IEC (2001) Software engineering – product quality – part 1: quality model. ISO/IEC Standard 9126-1, International Organization for Standardization
Krogstie J, Sindre G, Jørgensen H (2006) Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. European Journal of Information Systems 15(1):91–102
Lindland OI, Sindre G, Sølvberg A (1994) Understanding quality in conceptual modeling. IEEE Software 11(2):42–49
March ST, Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4):251–266
Martin B, Ringham F (2006) Key terms in semiotics. Continuum, New York
McDonald MP, Aron D (2010) Leading in times of transition: the 2010 CIO agenda. Gartner, Inc
Melenovsky MJ (2005) Business process management’s success hinges on business-led inititatives. Gartner, Inc
Mendling J (2008) Metrics for process models: empirical foundations of verification, error prediction, and guidelines for correctness. Springer, Heidelberg
Mendling J (2009) Empirical studies in process model verification. In: Proc transactions on petri nets and other models of concurrency II. Lect Notes Comput Sci, Bd 5460. Springer, Berlin, S 208–224
Mendling J, Reijers HA, van der Aalst WMP (2010) Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Information and Software Technology 52(2):127–136
Mendling J, Stremberg M, Recker J (2012) Factors of process model comprehension − findings from a series of experiments. Decision Support Systems 53(1):195–206
Mendling J, Verbeek H, van Dongen B, van der Aalst W, Neumann G (2008) Detection and prediction of errors in EPCs of the SAP reference model. Data & Knowledge Engineering 64(1):312–329
Moody DL (2005) Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions. Data & Knowledge Engineering 55(3):243–276
Moody DL (2009) The “physics” of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35(6):756–779
Moody DL, Shanks GG (1994) What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. In: Proc 13th international conference on the entity-relationship approach, Manchester. Lect Notes Comput Sci, Bd 881. Springer, Berlin, S 94–111
Moody DL, Sindre G, Brasethvik T, Sølvberg A (2003) Evaluating the quality of information models: empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework. In: Proc 25th international conference on software engineering, Portland. IEEE Comput Soc, Los Alamitos, S 295–307
Morris CW (1938) Foundations of the theory of signs. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Nöth W (1990) Handbook of semiotics. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
OMG (2003) UML 2.0 superstructure specification. Adopted specification, ptc/03-08-02, Object Management Group
OMG (2007) Business process model and notation (BPMN) 2.0. Request for proposal. BMI/2007-06-05, Object Management Group
Overhage S, Schlauderer S, Birkmeier D (2011) Sind Ereignisgesteuerte Prozessketten besser für Fachanwender geeignet als UML Aktivitätsdiagramme? Eine empirische Untersuchung. In: Proc 10th international conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Zürich, Bd 2, S 745–755
Overhage S, Schlauderer S, Birkmeier D (2012) Sagt ein Geschäftsprozessdiagramm mehr als tausend Worte? Eine empirische Studie zur Verwendbarkeit von EPK und Normsprache für Fachanwender. Universität Augsburg, Augsburg
Patig S, Casanova-Brito V, Vögeli B (2010) IT requirements of business process management in practice – an empirical study. In: Proc 8th business process management conference, Hoboken. Lect Notes Comput Sci, Bd 6336. Springer, Heidelberg, S 13–28
Poels G, Maes A, Gailly F, Paemeleire R (2005) Measuring the perceived semantic quality of information models. In: Proc ER Workshops AOIS, BP-UML, CoMoGIS, eCOMO, and QoIS, Klagenfurt. Lect Notes Comput Sci. Springer, Heidelberg, S 376–385
Recker J, Indulska M, Rosemann M, Green P (2009) Business process modeling – a comparative analysis. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 10(4):333–363
Recker J, Rosemann M, Green PF, Indulska M (2011) Do ontological deficiencies in modeling grammars matter? Management Information Systems Quarterly 35(1):57–79
Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York
Saaty TL (1986) Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 32(7):841–855
Saaty TL (1994) How to make a decision: the analytic hierachy process. Interfaces 24(6):19–43
Scheer AW, Thomas O, Adam O (2005) Process modeling using event-driven process chains. In: Dumas M, van der Aalst WMP, Hofstede AHM (Hrsg) Bridging people and software through process technology. Wiley, Hoboken
Schütte R (1998) Vergleich alternativer Ansätze zur Bewertung der Informationsmodellqualität. In: Proc Fachtagung Modellierung betrieblicher Informationssysteme, Koblenz
Schütte R, Rotthowe T (1998) The guidelines of modeling – an approach to enhance the quality in information models. In: Proc 17th international conference on conceptual modeling, Singapore. Lect Notes Comput Sci, Bd 1507. Springer, Heidelberg, S 240–254
Sebeok TA (2001) Signs: an introduction to semiotics, 2. Aufl. University of Toronto Press, Toronto
Sebeok TA, Danesi M (2000) The forms of meaning: modeling systems theory and semiotic analysis. de Gruyter, Berlin
Sebeok TA, Danesi M (Hrsg) (2010) Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics: N-Z. de Gruyter, Berlin
Shanks GG, Darke P (1997) Quality in conceptual modelling: linking theory and practice. In: Proc 3rd Pacific Asia conference on information systems, Brisbane, S 805–814
Sommerville I (1992) Software engineering, 4. Aufl. Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
Takeda H, Veerkamp P, Tomiyama T, Yoshikawa H (1990) Modeling design processes. AI Magazine 11(4):37–48
Vaishnavi V, Kuechler W (2004) Design science research in information systems. http://ais.affiniscape.com/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=279
Vanderfeesten I, Cardoso J, Mendling J, Reijers HA, van der Aalst W (2007) Quality metrics for business process models. In: Fischer L (Hrsg) BPM & workflow handbook 2007: future strategies, Lighthouse Point, S 179–190
Weske M (2007) Business process management: concepts, languages, architectures. Springer, Berlin
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Angenommen nach zwei Überarbeitungen durch Prof. Dr. Rosemann.
This article is also available in English via http://www.springerlink.com and http://www.bise-journal.org: Overhage S, Birkmeier DQ, Schlauderer S (2012) Quality Marks, Metrics, and Measurement Procedures for Business Process Models. The 3QM-Framework. Bus Inf Syst Eng. doi: 10.1007/s12599-012-0230-8.
Zusätzliche Information
Ergänzendes Onlinematerial kann unter folgendem Link abgerufen werden.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Overhage, S., Birkmeier, D.Q. & Schlauderer, S. Qualitätsmerkmale, -metriken und -messverfahren für Geschäftsprozessmodelle. Wirtschaftsinf 54, 217–235 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11576-012-0335-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11576-012-0335-1