Methods for Evaluating the Quality of Process Modelling Tools

  • Josef PavlicekEmail author
  • Petra PavlickovaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 332)


This invited workshop Methods for evaluating the quality of process modelling tools was a part of EOMAS 2018. Workshop dealt with the comparison of BPMN and BORM process modelling tools in the form of Usability study. We practically presented the methods used to compare, defined the appropriate equipment of the laboratory and proposed the CASE study model. We hired participants (from the audience) and we used Tobii Glasses for eyes tracking and recording the participants focus. This technology has been used by authors in previous years to find a measure of quality of process models, and this year has been demonstrated and applied on BPMN and DEMO models.


BPMN BORM Usability study Process modelling tools TOBII Glasses 


  1. 1.
    Pavlicek, J., Hronza, R., Pavlickova, P., Jelinkova, K.: The business process model quality metrics. In: Pergl, R., Lock, R., Babkin, E., Molhanec, M. (eds.) EOMAS 2017. LNBIP, vol. 298, pp. 134–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). ISBN 978-3-319-68184-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pavlicek, J., Hronza, R., Pavlickova, P.: Educational business process model skills improvement. In: Pergl, R., Molhanec, M., Babkin, E., Fosso Wamba, S. (eds.) EOMAS 2016. LNBIP, vol. 272, pp. 172–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). ISBN 978-3-319-49454-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hronza, R., Pavlíček, J., Náplava, P.: Míry kvality procesních modelů vytvořených v notaci BPMN. Acta Inform. Pragensia 4(2), 140–153 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jelínková, K.: Návrh měr kvality obchodních procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lassaková, M.: Návrh a tvorba měr pro výpočet kvality procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neumann, M.: Míry kvality procesních modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hronza, R., Pavlíček, J., Mach, R., Náplava, P.: Míry kvality v procesním modelování. Acta Inform. Pragensia 4(1), 18–29 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mach, R.: Návrh a tvorba nástroje pro optimalizaci procesů na základě analýzy BPM modelů. Czech Technical University in Prague (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bruce, S.: BPMN Method and Style. Cody-Cassidy Press, Aptos (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    OMG: Business Process Model & Notation (BPMN) (2016). Accessed 21 Mar 2017
  11. 11.
    Knott, R., Merunka, V., Polak, J.: The BORM methodology: a third-generation fully object-oriented. Knowl.-Based Syst. 16(2), 77–89 (2003). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bassetto, L.: OntoUML Specification.
  13. 13.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language (UML) (2008).
  14. 14.
    Náplava, P., Pergl, R.: Empirical study of applying the DEMO method for improving BPMN process models in academic environment. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Conference on Business Informatics, pp. 18–26. IEEE Operations Center, Piscataway (2015). ISBN 978-1-4673-7340-1Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nielsen Norman Group: Evidence-Based User Experience Research.
  16. 16.
    Nielsen, J.: Why you only need to test with 5 users. Jakob Nielsens Alertbox 19, 1–4 (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pavlicek, J., Bock, R.: Collaborative usability lab design and methodology to use that, part of HUBRU. Accessed 7 Jul 2018
  18. 18.
    Tobii Tech: Eye tracking. Accessed 7 Jul 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Information Technology, Department of Software EngineeringCTUPragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics and Management, Department of Systems EngineeringCzech University of Life SciencesPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations