Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

OTM Confederated International Conferences "On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems"

OTM 2010: On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2010 pp 78–95Cite as

Quality Assessment of Business Process Models Based on Thresholds

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 6426))

Abstract

Process improvement is recognized as the main benefit of process modelling initiatives. Quality considerations are important when conducting a process modelling project. While the early stage of business process design might not be the most expensive ones, they tend to have the highest impact on the benefits and costs of the implemented business processes. In this context, quality assurance of the models has become a significant objective. In particular, understandability and modifiability are quality attributes of special interest in order to facilitate the evolution of business models in a highly dynamic environment. These attributes can only be assessed a posteriori, so it is of central importance for quality management to identify significant predictors for them. A variety of structural metrics have recently been proposed, which are tailored to approximate these usage characteristics. The aim of this paper is to verify how understandable and modifiable BPMN models relate to these metrics by means of correlation and regression analyses. Based on the results we determine threshold values to distinguish different levels of process model quality. As such threshold values are missing in prior research, we expect to see strong implications of our approach on the design of modelling guidelines.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Pfleeger, S.L.: Integrating Process and Measurement. In: Melton, A. (ed.) Software Measurement, pp. 53–74. International Thomson Computer Press (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part A. Business Process Management Journal 12(2), 249–254 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Indulska, M., Green, P., Recker, J., Rosemann, M.: Business Process Modeling: Perceived Benefits. In: Laender, A.H.F. (ed.) ER 2009. LNCS, vol. 5829, pp. 458–471. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Moody, D.: Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 55, 243–276 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual modeling and telos. In: Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case: an Integrated View of Information Systems Development, ch. 2, pp. 49–68 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dandekar, A., Perry, D.E., Votta, L.G.: Studies in Process Simplification. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Software Process, pp. 27–35 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  7. ISO/IEC, ISO Standard 9000-2000: Quality Management Systems: Fundamentals and Vocabulary (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. ISO/IEC, 9126-1, Software engineering - product quality - Part 1: Quality Model (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sánchez González, L., García, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M.: Measurement in Business Processes: a Systematic Review. Business Process Management Journal 16(1), 114–134 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zelkowitz, M., Wallace, D.: Esperimental models for validating technology. IEEE Computer, Computing practices (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mendling, J.: Metrics for Process Models: Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction, and Guidelines for Correctness. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, Heidelberg (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. OMG. Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), Final Adopted Specification (2006), http://www.omg.org/bpm

  13. Gilmore, D., Green, T.: Comprehension and Recall of miniature programs. International Jounal of Man-Machine Studies archive 21(1), 31–48 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rittgen, P.: Negotiating Models. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 561–573. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part B. Business Process Management Journal 12(3), 377–384 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Cardoso, J.: What makes process models understandable? In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Green, T.R.G., Petre, M.: Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a cognitive dimensions framework. J. Visual Languages and Computing 7, 131–174 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Experiments (2009), http://alarcos.inf-cr.uclm.es/bpmnexperiments/

  19. Foss, T., Stensrud, E., Kitchenham, B., Myrtveit, I.: A Simulation Study of the Model Evaluation Criterion MMRE. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29, 985–995 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering, T. report, Editor, Keele University and University of Durham (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cardoso, J.: Process control-flow complexity metric: An empirical validation. In: SCC 2006: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, pp. 167–173 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rolón, E., García, F., Ruiz, F.: Evaluation Measures for Business Process Models. In: Symposium in Applied Computing SAC 2006 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rolón, E., Cardoso, J., García, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M.: Analysis and Validation of Control-Flow Complexity Measures with BPMN Process Models. In: The 10th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rolón, E., Ruiz, F., García, F., Piattini, M.: Applying Software Process Metrics in Business Process. Procesos y Métricas, Asociación Española de Métricas del Software 3(2) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rolon, E., Sanchez, L., Garcia, F., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., Caivano, D., Visaggio, G.: Prediction Models for BPMN Usability and Maintainability. In: BPMN 2009 - 1st International Workshop on BPMN, pp. 383–390 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Evaluating Workflow Process Designs using Cohesion and Coupling Metrics. In: Computer in Industry (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Cardoso, J.: On a Quest for Good Process models: the Cross Conectivity Metric. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 480–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Mendling, J.: Testing Density as a complexity Metric for EPCs, in Technical Report JM-2006-11-15 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cardoso, J.: How to Measure the Control-Flow Complexity of Web Processes and Workflows. In: Workflow Handbook 2005 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cardoso, J.: Business Process Quality Metrics: Log-based Complexity of Workflow Patterns. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 427–434. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Jung, J.Y.: Measuring entropy in business process models. In: International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control, pp. 246–252 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Latva-Koivisto, A.M.: Finding a Complexity Measure for Business Process Models. Individual Research Projects in Applied Mathematics (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Complexity Metrics for business Process Models. In: International Conference on Business Information Systems (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Adopting the Cognitive Complexity Measure for Business Process Models. In: 5th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, ICCI 2006, vol. 1, pp. 236–241 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Information Systems 33, 64–95 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Laue, R., Mendling, J.: Structuredness and its Significance for Correctness of Process Models. In: Information Systems and E-Business Management (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Meimandi Parizi, R., Ghani, A.A.A.: An Ensemble of Complexity Metrics for BPEL Web Processes. In: Ninth ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing, pp. 753–758 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Bisgaard Lassen, K., Van der Aalst, W.: Complexity Metrics for Workflow Nets. In: Information and Software Technology, pp. 610–626 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Huan, Z., Kumar, A.: New quality metrics for evaluating process models. In: Business Process Intelligence Workshop (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Henderson-Sellers, B.: Object-Oriented Metrics: Measures of Complexity. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Shatnawi, R., Li, W., Swain, J., Newman, T.: Finding Software Metrics Threshold values using ROC Curves. In: Sofware Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Churchill, G.A., Doerge, R.W.: Empirical Threshold Values for Quantitative Trait Mapping. Genetics Society of America 138, 963–971 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bender, R.: Quantitative Risk Assessment in Epidemiological Studies Investigatin Threshold Effects. Biometrical Journal 41(3), 305–319 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Royston, P., Douglas, G.A., Sauerbrei, W.: Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: a bad idea. Statistics in Medicine 25, 127–141 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Grupo Alarcos, Universidad de Castilla La Mancha, Paseo de la Universidad, nº4, 13071, Ciudad Real, España

    Laura Sánchez-González, Félix García & Francisco Ruiz

  2. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, D-10099, Berlin, Germany

    Jan Mendling

Authors
  1. Laura Sánchez-González
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Félix García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Mendling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francisco Ruiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. STAR Lab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Bldg G/10, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Robert Meersman

  2. Curtin University of Technology, DEBII - CBS, De Laeter Way, Bentley, 6102, WA, Australia

    Tharam Dillon

  3. Facultad de Informática, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Campus de Montegancedo S/N, 28660, Boadilla del Monte, Madrid, Spain

    Pilar Herrero

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sánchez-González, L., García, F., Mendling, J., Ruiz, F. (2010). Quality Assessment of Business Process Models Based on Thresholds. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2010. OTM 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6426. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16934-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16934-2_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16933-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16934-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation