Skip to main content
Log in

Eliciting and Modeling Business Process Stories

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Business & Information Systems Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most business process modeling tools used today encourage the rendition of lean, prescribed and clearly coordinated activities, which often clash with far more intricate business realities. This paper evaluates an alternative approach that adopts concepts from storytelling and sense-making theories to elicit process stories. The viability of this approach is tested in a case study involving sixteen individuals from the same organization who tell their personal views about a business process, thus gathering a total of twenty process stories. The obtained results suggest that process stories may increase the meaningfulness, contextualization and overall richness of process models.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://bpt.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/BPMAcademicInitiative.

References

  • Aguilar-Saven RS (2004) Business process modelling: review and framework. Int J Prod Econ 90:129–149. doi:10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00102-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antunes P, Mourão H (2011) Resilient business process management: framework and services. Expert Syst Appl 38:1241–1254. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antunes P, Simões D, Carriço L, Pino JA (2013) An end-user approach to business process modeling. J Netw Comput Appl 36:1466–1479. doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2013.03.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley A (1992) Working memory. Science 255:556–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandara W, Gable GG, Rosemann M (2005) Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study. Eur J Inf Syst 14:347–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basili VR, Weiss DM (1984) A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Trans Softw Eng (TSE) 10:728–738. doi:10.1109/TSE.1984.5010301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat I, Goldstein DK, Mead M (1987) The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q 11(3):369–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennet D, Bennet A (2008) Engaging tacit knowledge in support of organizational learning. Vine 38:72–94. doi:10.1108/03055720810870905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borges MRS, Pino JA (1999) PAWS: towards a participatory approach to business process reengineering. In: String processing and information retrieval symposium, 1999 and international workshop on groupware (SPIRE/CRIWG). IEEE Comput. Soc, Cancun, pp 262–269

  • Brossard A, Abed M, Kolski C (2011) Taking context into account in conceptual models using a model driven engineering approach. Inf Softw Technol 53:1349–1369. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2011.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS, Duguid P (1998) Organizing knowledge. Calif Manag Rev 40:90–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabitza F, Simone C (2013) Computational coordination mechanisms: a tale of a struggle for flexibility. Comput Support Coop Work (CSCW) 22:475–529. doi:10.1007/s10606-013-9187-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caetano A, Silva AR, Tribolet J (2005) Using roles and business objects to model and understand business processes. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC ‘05). ACM, Santa Fe, pp 1308–1313

  • Chakraborty S, Sarker S, Sarker S (2010) An exploration into the process of requirements elicitation: a grounded approach. J Assoc Inf Syst 11:212–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Correia ACE (2014) Quality of process modeling using BPMN: a model-driven approach. Dissertation, Universidade Nova de Lisboa

  • da Cunha Mattos T, Santoro FM, Revoredo K, Nunes VT (2014) A formal representation for context-aware business processes. Comput Ind 65:1193–1214. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2014.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denning S (2000) The springboard: how storytelling ignites action in knowledge-era organizations. J Organ Change Manag 14:609–614. doi:10.1108/jocm.2001.14.6.609.2

    Google Scholar 

  • Denning S (2006) Effective storytelling: strategic business narrative techniques. Strateg Leadersh 34:42–48. doi:10.1108/10878570610637885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumas M, La Rosa M, Mendling J, Reijers HA (2013) Fundamentals of business process management. Springer, New York. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33143-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Figl K, Recker J (2014) Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences for process representations. Requir Eng 19:1–23. doi:10.1007/s00766-014-0210-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleischmann A, Schmidt W, Stary C, Obermeier S, Brger E (2012) Subject-oriented business process management. Springer, Heidelberg, New York. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32392-8

  • Fleischmann A, Kannengiesser U, Schmidt W, Stary C (2013) Subject-oriented modeling and execution of multi-agent business processes. In: 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM international joint conferences on web intelligence (WI) and intelligent agent technologies (IAT), vol 2. IEEE, pp 138–145

  • Gershon N, Page W (2001) What storytelling can do for information visualization. Commun ACM 44:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giaglis GM (2001) A taxonomy of business process modeling and information systems modeling techniques. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 13:209–228. doi:10.1023/A:1011139719773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman J, Brown R, Johnson D, Rinderle-Ma S, Kannengiesser U (2015) Virtual business role-play: leveraging familiar environments to prime stakeholder memory during process elicitation. In: Zdravkovic J, Kirikova M, Johannesson P (eds) Advanced information systems engineering. CAiSE 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9097. Springer, Cham, pp 166–180

  • Holt AW, Ramsey HR, Grimes JD (1983) Coordination system technology as the basis for a programming environment. Electr Commun 57:307–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommes BJ, van Reijswoud V (2000) Assessing the quality of business process modelling techniques. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, vol 1. Maui, p 1007

  • Jonnavithula L, Antunes P, Cranefield J, Pino JA (2015) Organisational issues in modelling business processes: an activity-based inventory and directions for research. In: 19th Pacific Asia conference on information systems (PACIS), Singapore

  • Kabicher S, Rinderle-Ma S (2011) Human-centered process engineering based on content analysis and process view aggregation. In: Mouratidis H, Rolland C (eds) Advanced information systems engineering. CAiSE 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6741. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-21640-4

  • Kock N, Verville J, Danesh-Pajou A, DeLuca D (2009) Communication flow orientation in business process modeling and its effect on redesign success: results from a field study. Decis Support Syst 46:562–575. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2008.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krogstie J (2007) Modelling of the people, by the people, for the people. In: Krogstie J, Opdahl AL, Brinkkemper S (eds) Conceptual modelling in information systems engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 305–318. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72677-7_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kunze M, Luebbe A, Weidlich M, Weske M (2011) Towards understanding process modeling—the case of the BPM academic initiative. Business process model and notation, vol 95. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 44–58

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lakin R, Capon N, Botten N (1996) BPR enabling software for the financial services industry. Manag Serv 40(3):18–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold H, Mendling J, Polyvyanyy A (2014) Supporting process model validation through natural language generation. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 40:818–840. doi:10.1109/TSE.2014.2327044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lethbridge TC, Sim SE, Singer J (2005) Studying software engineers: data collection techniques for software field studies. Empir Softw Eng 10:311–341. doi:10.1007/s10664-005-1290-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay A, Downs D, Lunn K (2003) Business processes—attempts to find a definition. Inf Softw Technol 45:1015–1019. doi:10.1016/S0950-5849(03)00129-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • List B, Korherr B (2006) An evaluation of conceptual business process modelling languages. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing (SAC ‘06). ACM, New York, pp 1532–1539

  • Mayer RE (1989) Models for understanding. Rev Educ Res 59:43–64. doi:10.3102/00346543059001043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RJ, Menzel CP, Painter MK, Dewitte PS, Blinn T (1995) Information integration for concurrent engineering (IICE), IDEF3 process description capture method report. http://www.idef.com/pdf/idef3_fn.pdf. Accessed 30 Mar 2015

  • McCloud S (1993) Understanding comics: the invisible art. William Morrow Paperbacks, Northampton

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendling J, Recker J, Reijers HA (2010) On the usage of labels and icons in business process modeling. Int J Inf Syst Model Des (IJISMD) 1:40–58. doi:10.4018/jismd.2010040103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardella K, Brown RA, Kriglstein S (2014) Storyboard augmentation of process model grammars for stakeholder communication. In: International conference on information visualization theory and applications. SCITEPRESS-Science and Technology Publications, pp 114–121

  • Object Management Group (2011) Unified modelling language (OMG UML) superstructure. http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Superstructure. Accessed 15 Jun 2015

  • Object Management Group (2013) Business process model and notation (BPMN). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.2/PDF. Accessed 15 Jun 2015

  • Ottensooser A, Fekete A, Reijers HA, Mendling J, Menictas C (2012) Making sense of business process descriptions: an experimental comparison of graphical and textual notations. J Syst Softw 85:596–606. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.09.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perret R, Borges MRS, Santoro FM (2004) Applying group storytelling in knowledge management. In: de Vreede GJ, Guerrero LA, Marín Raventós G (eds) Groupware: design, implementation, and use. CRIWG 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3198. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 34–41

  • Pesic M (2008) Constraint-based workflow management systems: shifting control to users. Dissertation, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

  • Polanyi M (1967) The tacit dimension. Anchor, Garden City

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker JC, Dreiling A (2007) Does it matter which process modelling language we teach or use? An experimental study on understanding process modelling languages without formal education. ACIS. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, pp 356–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker J, Indulska M, Rosemann M, Green PF (2006) How good is BPMN really? Insights from theory and practice. In: 14th European conference on information systems. Goeteborg, pp 1582–1593

  • Recker J, Safrudin N, Rosemann M (2010) How novices model business processes. In: International conference on business process management. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 29–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Riemer K, Johnston R, Indulska M (2014) Questioning the philosophical foundations of business process modelling. In: Information systems foundations: theorising in a dynamic discipline. ANU E Press, Canberra, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann M, Recker J, Flender C (2008) Contextualisation of business processes. Int J Bus Process Integr Manag 3:47–60. doi:10.1504/IJBPIM.2008.019347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runeson P, Höst M (2009) Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empir Softw Eng 14:131–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell N, van der Aalst W, ter Hofstede A, Wohed P (2006) On the suitability of UML 2.0 activity diagrams for business process modelling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Asia-Pacific conference on conceptual modelling (APCCM ‘06), vol 53. Australian Computer Society, Darlinghurst, pp 95–104

  • Santoro F, Borges M, Pino J (2010) Acquiring knowledge on business processes from stakeholders’ stories. Adv Eng Inform 24:138–148. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2009.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer A-W, Thomas O, Adam O (2005) Process modeling using event-driven process chains. Process Aware Inf Syst. doi:10.1002/0471741442.ch6

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnupp WRP, Muchnick SS (1992) Primer in petri net design. Springer, Secaucus

    Google Scholar 

  • Short JC, Reeves TC (2009) The graphic novel: a “cool” format for communicating to generation Y. Bus Commun Q 72:414–430. doi:10.1177/1080569909336464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simões D, Antunes P, Cranefield J (2016) Enriching knowledge in business process modelling: a storytelling approach. In: Razmerita L, Phillips-Wren G, Jain L (eds) Innovations in knowledge management: the impact of social media, semantic web and cloud computing, vol 95. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 241–267. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-47827-1_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aa H, Leopold H, Mannhardt F, Reijers HA (2015a) On the fragmentation of process information: challenges, solutions, and outlook. Bus process model not, vol 214. Springer, Cham, pp 3–18

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Aa H, Leopold H, Reijers HA (2015b) Detecting inconsistencies between process models and textual descriptions. In: Motahari-Nezhad H, Recker J, Weidlich M (eds) Business process management. BPM 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9253. Springer, Cham, pp 90–105. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-23063-4

  • van der Aalst W (2013) Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw Eng 2013:1–37. doi:10.1155/2013/507984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst W, ter Hofstede A (2005) YAWL: yet another workflow language. Inf Syst 30:245–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst W, ter Hofstede A, Kiepuszewski B, Barros A (2003) Workflow patterns. Distrib Parallel Databases 14:5–51. doi:10.1023/A:1022883727209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE (1993) The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: the Mann Gulch disaster. Adm Sci Q 38:628–652. doi:10.2307/2393339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE (1995) Sensemaking in organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams AM, Alspaugh TA (2008) Articulating software requirements comic book style. In: Third international workshop on multimedia and enjoyable requirements engineering-beyond mere descriptions and with more fun and games, pp 4–8

  • Wohed P, van der Aalst WMP, Dumas M, ter Hofstede AHM, Russell N (2006) On the suitability of BPMN for business process modelling. Business Process Management, vol 4102. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 161–176

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Simões.

Additional information

Accepted after two revisions by Prof. Dr. Becker.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 180 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simões, D., Antunes, P. & Carriço, L. Eliciting and Modeling Business Process Stories. Bus Inf Syst Eng 60, 115–132 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0475-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0475-3

Keywords

Navigation