Evaluating Perceived Usefulness and Ease of Use of CMMN and DCR

Jalali, Amin

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79186-5_10

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To evaluate the applicability of CMMN language for KiPs modeling, we conducted an empirical evaluation study based on the experience and perception of modelers when they use CMMN for KiPs modeling. In contrast to others (Jalali, 2021), we focused our study on the support each newly introduced CMMN element provides for each characteristic to conclude on KiPs' modeling characteristics support. The overall duration of the evaluation study was 3 weeks (e.g., 21 days).…”

Section: Empirical Evaluation Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring CMMN applicability to knowledge‐intensive process modeling: An empirical evaluation by modelers

Routis

Bardaki

Νικολαϊδου

et al. 2022

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge‐intensive processes (KiPs) have emerged characterizing tasks that are data‐driven, change dynamically and depend on the knowledge and experience of knowledge workers. Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) language was introduced for modeling unstructured, agile human‐centric processes. As the available Business Process Modeling (BPM) methods and practices are not adequate for modeling KiPs, this paper presents an empirical study of the applicability of CMMN to modeling KiPs. After experienced modelers designed the models of three KiPs scenarios utilizing CMMN, their perceptions were collected assessing the support of CMMN to the KiPs characteristics. Specifically, the modelers assessed the support of the newly introduced CMMN notation elements to the KiPs characteristics. Three of them, that is, knowledge‐driven, unpredictable, and goal‐oriented, were highlighted as the ones that get the greater support by CMMN when it comes to modeling KiPs; the participating modelers suggested that the applicability of CMMN to modeling KiPs is mostly reinforced by the Sentries element. Considering that in a knowledge‐driven economy, organizations are called to transform their way of thinking and manage KiPs, we value the modelers' opinions since they shall apply such practices in the future. This research is a first step to assess whether CMMN may be a “fit” for modeling KiPs. When considering the potential of CMMN for KiPs modeling, the perceptions of such real CMMN users are also first indications of the CMMN future in terms of application.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Evaluation Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast to others (Jalali, 2021), we focused our study on the support each newly introduced CMMN element provides for each characteristic to conclude on KiPs' modeling characteristics support. The overall duration of the evaluation study was 3 weeks (e.g., 21 days).…”

Section: Empirical Evaluation Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring CMMN applicability to knowledge‐intensive process modeling: An empirical evaluation by modelers

Routis

Bardaki

Νικολαϊδου

et al. 2022

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Systematic Comparison of Case Management Languages

Holz

Pufahl

Weber

2023

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating user acceptance of knowledge-intensive business process modeling languages

Jalali

2023

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case Management has been evolving to support knowledge-intensive business process management, resulting in different modeling languages, e.g., Declare, Dynamic Condition Response (DCR), and Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN). A language will die if users do not accept and use it in practice—similar to extinct human languages. Thus, evaluating how users perceive languages is important to improve them. Although some studies have investigated how the process designers perceived Declare and DCR, there is a lack of research on how they perceive CMMN—especially in comparison with other languages. Therefore, this paper investigates and compares how process designers perceive these languages based on the Technology Acceptance Model. The paper includes two studies conducted in 2020 and 2022, both performed by educating participants through a course, with feedback on their assignments, to reduce biases. The perceptions are collected through questionnaires before and after feedback on the final practice. Results show that the perceptions change is insignificant after feedback due to the participants being well-trained. The reliability of responses was tested using Cronbach’s alpha. The results of the first study show that both DCR and CMMN were perceived as having acceptable usefulness and ease of use, but CMMN was perceived as significantly better than DCR in terms of ease of use. The results of the second study show that only DCR was perceived significantly better than Declare in terms of usefulness. The participants’ feedback shows potential areas for improvement in languages and tool support to enhance perceived usefulness and ease of use.

show abstract

Evaluating Perceived Usefulness and Ease of Use of CMMN and DCR

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Exploring CMMN applicability to knowledge‐intensive process modeling: An empirical evaluation by modelers

Exploring CMMN applicability to knowledge‐intensive process modeling: An empirical evaluation by modelers

A Systematic Comparison of Case Management Languages

Evaluating user acceptance of knowledge-intensive business process modeling languages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About