Tangible Media in Process Modeling – A Controlled Experiment
In current practice, business processes modeling is done by trained method experts. Domain experts are interviewed to elicit their process information but typically not involved in actual modeling. We created a tangible toolkit for process modeling to be used with domain experts. We hypothesize that it results in more effective process elicitation.
This paper assesses nine aspects related to ”effective elicitation” in a controlled experiment using questionnaires and video analysis. We compare our approach to structured interviews in a repeated measurement design. Subjects were 17 student clerks from a trade school.
We conclude that tangible modeling leads to more effective elicitation through activation of participants and validation of results. In particular, subjects take more time to think about their process and apply more corrections to it. They also report to get insights into process modeling.
Keywordsprocess elicitation tangible media controlled experiment
- 1.Byrd, T., Cossick, K., Zmud, R.: A synthesis of research on requirements analysis and knowledge acquisition techniques. MIS Quarterly, 117–138 (1992)Google Scholar
- 2.Cooper, D., Schindler, P.: Business Research Methods, 10th edn. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York (2008)Google Scholar
- 3.Creswell, J.W.: Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Pubns, Thousand Oaks (2008)Google Scholar
- 4.Davis, A., Dieste, O., Hickey, A., Juristo, N., Moreno, A.: Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: Empirical results derived from a systematic review. In: 14th IEEE International Conference Requirements Engineering, pp. 179–188 (2006)Google Scholar
- 8.Grosskopf, A., Weske, M.: On business process model reviews. In: CAiSE 2010, pp. 31–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
- 9.Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. Collins Business (2003)Google Scholar
- 11.Ishii, H., Ullmer, B.: Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In: SIGCHI, pp. 234–241. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
- 12.Jedlitschka, A., Ciolkowski, M., Pfahl, D.: Reporting experiments in software engineering. Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering, 201–228 (2008)Google Scholar
- 13.Kirk, J., Miller, M.: Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Sage Publications, Inc., Newbury Park (1986)Google Scholar
- 15.Luebbe, A., Weske, M.: The effect of tangible media on individuals in business process modeling - a controlled experiment. Tech. Rep. 41, Hasso-Plattner-Institute for IT Systems Engineering (2010), http://bpt.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/Public/AlexanderGrosskopf
- 16.Persson, A.: Enterprise modelling in practice: situational factors and their influence on adopting a participative approach. Ph.D. thesis, Stockholm University (2001)Google Scholar
- 17.Recker, J., Rosemann, M.: The measurement of perceived ontological deficiencies of conceptual modeling grammars. Data & Knowledge Engineering (2010)Google Scholar
- 19.Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., Bakker, A.: The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies 3(1), 71–92 (2002)Google Scholar
- 21.Sedera, W., Gable, G., Rosemann, M., Smyth, R.: A success model for business process modeling: findings from a multiple case study. In: PACIS, Shanghai (2004)Google Scholar
- 22.Stevenson, A.: Oxford Dictionary of English, vol. 24. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010)Google Scholar
- 24.Weber, B., Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Wild, W.: Handling events during business process execution: An empirical test. In: ER-POIS at CAISE, pp. 19–30 (2010)Google Scholar
- 26.Xie, L., Antle, A.N., Motamedi, N.: Are tangibles more fun?: comparing children’s enjoyment and engagement using physical, graphical and tangible user interfaces. In: Proceedings of TEI, pp. 191–198. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar