How novices design business processes

Recker, Jan; Safrudin, Norizan; Rosemann, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.is.2011.07.001

Cited by 41 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, research into conceptual modeling is dominated by comprehension-oriented tasks (e.g., [19][20][21][22]) rather than conceptual modeling tasks (e.g., [23]) and research settings applying neuro-physiological tools favor static diagrams over (dynamic) processes (e.g., [5][6][7][8]). Moreover, in a more general context, most of the studies applying neurophysiological tools in IS are stimulus-response tasks rather than generative -addressing short-term experiments (episodes) rather than longer-term processes [14, p. 107].…”

Section: Discussion and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studying the Creation of Design Artifacts

Davis

Hevner

Weber

2016

Information Systems and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussion and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studying the Creation of Design Artifacts

Davis

Hevner

Weber

2016

Information Systems and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recker, et al identified five methods that novices apply to construct a process model: textual design, flowchart design, hybrid design, storyboard design, and canvas design [20]. Pinggera, et al coded modeling observations in sequences of adding, deleting and laying out model elements and used clustering techniques to define three modeling styles: slower modeling/more reconciliation, slower modeling/less reconciliation, and faster modeling/less reconciliation [5].…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Structured Process Modeling Method: Building the Prescriptive Modeling Theory

Claes

Vanderfeesten

Gailly

et al. 2017

Business Process Management Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In their effort to control and manage processes, organizations often create process models. The quality of such models is not always optimal, because it is challenging for a modeler to translate her mental image of the process into a formal process description. In order to support this complex human processing task, we are developing a smart process modeling method. This paper describes how we have built the underlying prescriptive theory, which is constructed from existing evidence about successful information processing techniques in cognitive psychology.Keywords: business process management, business process modeling, human aspects of bpm, smart bpm, process of process modeling IntroductionIn an ever-increasing competitive market and in the context of globalization, masscustomization and risk management, it is currently considered important for organizations to manage and control their core processes. One of the instruments developed to support process management are process models, i.e., representations of certain aspects of the process that abstract from individual process executions [1].Process models are typically constructed to support communication, documentation, analysis, simulation, execution, etc.[1]. Quality of process models can thus be seen as a measure of how well the model succeeds in supporting the goal: i.e. the fit-for-purpose. Hence, various process model quality variables and metrics have been studied and developed, related to different goals [2,3] As such, the business process management community has developed a good understanding of what constitutes a 'good' process model. In contrast, far less is

show abstract

“…Design activities, e.g., conceptual modeling, involve the construction of a mental model of the domain from an informal requirements description and its externalization using the elements provided by the modeling notation [6] by using the tools provided by a design platform, e.g., the modeling editor [7]. During the externalization process, the designer evolves the design artifact, i.e., conceptual model, through a series of interactions from an initial state through intermediate states to a final state reflecting the requirements of the domain.…”

Section: Cognitive Load In Design Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring and Explaining Cognitive Load During Design Activities: A Fine-Grained Approach

Weber

Neurauter

Burattin

et al. 2017

Information Systems and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Recent advances in neuro-physiological measurements resulted in reliable and objective measures of Cognitive Load (CL), e.g., using pupillary responses. However, continuous measurement of CL in software design activities, e.g., conceptual modeling, has received little attention. In this paper, we present the progress of our work intended to close this gap by continuously measuring cognitive load during design activities. This work aims at advancing our understanding of WHEN and WHY designers face challenges. For this, we attempt to explore and explain the occurrence of CL using fine-granular units of analysis (e.g., type of subtasks, evolution of design artifact's quality, and manner of technology use). We expect implications for the future development of intelligent software systems, which are aware WHEN a particular designer experiences challenges, but also WHY challenges occur.

show abstract

How novices design business processes

Cited by 41 publications

References 29 publications

Studying the Creation of Design Artifacts

Studying the Creation of Design Artifacts

Towards a Structured Process Modeling Method: Building the Prescriptive Modeling Theory

Measuring and Explaining Cognitive Load During Design Activities: A Fine-Grained Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About