Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework

Moody, Daniel L.; Sindre, Guttorm; Brasethvik, Terje; Sølvberg, Arne

doi:10.1007/3-540-45816-6_36

Cited by 48 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It builds on semiotic theory and defines several quality aspects based on relationships between a model, a body of knowledge, a domain, a modeling language, and the activities of learning, taking action, and modeling. Its usefulness was confirmed in an experiment [29]. The Guidelines of Modeling (GoM) [2] define an alternative quality framework that is inspired by general accounting principles.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

Understanding the Occurrence of Errors in Process Models Based on Metrics

Mendling

Neumann

Aalst

2007

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2007: CoopIS, DOA, ODBASE, GADA, and IS

107

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Business process models play an important role for the management, design, and improvement of process organizations and processaware information systems. Despite the extensive application of process modeling in practice, there are hardly empirical results available on quality aspects of process models. This paper aims to advance the understanding of this matter by analyzing the connection between formal errors (such as deadlocks) and a set of metrics that capture various structural and behavioral aspects of a process model. In particular, we discuss the theoretical connection between errors and metrics, and provide a comprehensive validation based on an extensive sample of EPC process models from practice. Furthermore, we investigate the capability of the metrics to predict errors in a second independent sample of models. The high explanatory power of the metrics has considerable consequences for the design of future modeling guidelines and modeling tools.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

Understanding the Occurrence of Errors in Process Models Based on Metrics

Mendling

Neumann

Aalst

2007

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2007: CoopIS, DOA, ODBASE, GADA, and IS

107

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shortcomings: Some empirical testing of using the framework for evaluating models was carried out in Moody et al (2002a and, showing that the participants had problems in making reliable evaluations by means of it. While the set algebra definitions of various quality goals provide some clarity as to what the different quality levels mean, it is really only syntactic quality (of the levels in the original framework), which has any hope of being objectively measured, as both the problem domain and the minds of the stakeholders are unavailable for formal inspection.…”

Section: The Previous Sequal Framework and Its Shortcomingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework

Krogstie

Sindre

Jørgensen

2006

European Journal of Information Systems

Self Cite

251

180

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A semiotic framework for evaluating the quality of conceptual models was proposed by (Lindland OI, Sindre G and Sølvberg A (1994) Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modelling, IEEE Software 11(2), 41-49) and has later been extended in several works. While the extensions have fixed some of the limitations of the initial framework, other limitations remain. In particular, the framework is too static in its view upon semantic quality, mainly considering models, not modelling activities, and comparing these models to a static domain rather than seeing the model as a facilitator for changing the domain. Also, the framework's definition of pragmatic quality is quite narrow, focusing on understanding, in line with the semiotics of Morris, while newer research in linguistics and semiotics has focused beyond mere understanding, on how the model is used and impact its interpreters. The need for a more dynamic view in the semiotic quality framework is particularly evident when considering process models, which themselves often prescribe or even enact actions in the problem domain, hence a change to the model may also change the problem domain directly. This paper discusses the quality framework in relation to active process models and suggests a revised framework based on this.

show abstract

“…Krogstie and Arnesen [9] used a specialization of SEQUAL to evaluate various process modelling languages for use in Statoil. SEQUAL builds on early work on quality of models, but has been extended based on theoretical results [3], [4], [5] and practical experiences [2], [10], [11] with various extensions of the framework. It has earlier been used for evaluation of modelling and modelling languages of a large number of perspectives, including data, ontologies, process, enterprise, topological and goal-oriented modelling [2].…”

Section: Background On Modelling and Quality Of Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Syntactic Quality on Pragmatic Quality of Enterprise Process Models

Heggset

Krogstie

Wesenberg

2015

CSIMQ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. As approaches and tools for process and enterprise modelling are maturing, these techniques are being taken into use on a large scale in an increasing number of organizations. In this paper we report on the use of process modelling in connection to the quality system of Statoil, a large Norwegian oil company, in particular, on the aspects found necessary to be emphasized to achieve the appropriate quality of the models in this organization. Based on the investigation of usage statistics and user feedback on models, we have identified that there are problems in comprehending some of the models. Some of these models has poorer syntactic quality than the average syntactic quality of models of the same size. An experiment with improving syntactic quality on some of these models has given mixed results, and it appears that certain syntactic errors hinder comprehension more than others.

show abstract

Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework

Cited by 48 publications

References 27 publications

Understanding the Occurrence of Errors in Process Models Based on Metrics

Understanding the Occurrence of Errors in Process Models Based on Metrics

Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework

The Influence of Syntactic Quality on Pragmatic Quality of Enterprise Process Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About