Quality and perceived usefulness of process models

Modeling is now an essential ingredient in business process management and information systems development. The general usefulness of models in these areas is therefore generally accepted. It is also undisputed that the quality of the models has a significant impact on their usefulness. In the literature we can find any number of quality metrics, but hardly any study that investigates their relation with (perceived) usefulness and none that considers their relative impact on usefulness. We take a look at some of the most frequent quality dimensions and their relative impact on the perceived usefulness of models.

[1]  Ron Weber,et al.  Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling - A Research Agenda , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Comparative Evaluation of Large Data Model Representation Methods: The Analyst's Perspective , 2002, ER.

[3]  Peter Rittgen,et al.  Collaborative Modeling - A Design Science Approach , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[4]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[5]  Akhilesh Chandra,et al.  Representational congruence and information retrieval: Towards an extended model of cognitive fit , 1999, Decis. Support Syst..

[6]  Keng Siau,et al.  Improving the quality of conceptual modeling using cognitive mapping techniques , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[7]  G. Poels,et al.  Faculteit Economie En Bedrijfskunde Hoveniersberg 24 B-9000 Gent Working Paper Measuring User Beliefs and Attitudes towards Conceptual Models: a Factor and Structural Equation Model Measuring User Beliefs and Attitudes towards Conceptual Models: a Factor and Structural Equation Model , 2022 .

[8]  Jörg Becker,et al.  Guidelines of Business Process Modeling , 2000, Business Process Management.

[9]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[10]  Ivo Vondrák,et al.  Business Process Modeling , 2007, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[11]  Cheryl L. Dunn,et al.  Perceived semantic expressiveness of accounting systems and task accuracy effects , 2000, Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst..

[12]  Albert Endres,et al.  A handbook of software and systems engineering - empirical observations, laws and theories , 2003, The Fraunhofer IESE series on software engineering.

[13]  John Krogstie,et al.  Quality of Interactive Models , 2002, ER.

[14]  Gary B. Shelly,et al.  Systems Analysis and Design , 1991 .

[15]  Jeffrey L. Whitten,et al.  Systems Analysis and Design Methods , 1986 .

[16]  Raimundas Matulevicius.  Validating an Evaluation Framework for Requirements Engineering Tools , 2005, Information Modeling Methods and Methodologies.

[17]  Andrew Gemino,et al.  Complexity and clarity in conceptual modeling: Comparison of mandatory and optional properties , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[18]  Robert M. Hayes,et al.  Systems analysis and design , 1970, ACM '70.

[19]  E. Tansley,et al.  Using ontology to validate conceptual models , 2003, CACM.

[20]  Serge Demeyer,et al.  An experimental investigation of UML modeling conventions , 2006, MoDELS'06.

[21]  Jan L. G. Dietz,et al.  Understanding and Modelling Business Processes with DEMO , 1999, ER.

[22]  John Krogstie,et al.  Using a Semiotic Framework to Evaluate UML for the Development of Models of High Quality , 2001, Unified Modeling Language: Systems Analysis, Design and Development Issues.

[23]  Shin-Yuan Hung,et al.  DSS and EIS applications in Taiwan , 1997, Inf. Technol. People.

[24]  Guttorm Sindre,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Process Models : Empirical Analysis of a Quality Framework , 2022 .

[25]  Scott W. Ambler,et al.  The Elements of UML(TM) 2.0 Style , 2005 .

[26]  Scott W. Ambler,et al.  The Elements of UML™ 2.0 Style: UML Use-Case Diagrams , 2005 .

[27]  Arne Sølvberg,et al.  Understanding quality in conceptual modeling , 1994, IEEE Software.

[28]  Andreas L. Opdahl,et al.  Advanced Information Systems Engineering , 2007 .

[29]  Vijayan Sugumaran,et al.  A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[30]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[31]  Reinhard Schütte,et al.  Architectures for Evaluating the Quality of Information Models - a Meta and an Object Level Comparison , 1999, ER.

[32]  Venkataraman Ramesh,et al.  Improving information requirements determination: a cognitive perspective , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[33]  John Krogstie,et al.  A Semiotic Approach to Quality in Requirements Specifications , 2001, Organizational Semiotics.

[34]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[35]  August-Wilhelm Scheer,et al.  ARIS - Business Process Modeling , 1998 .

[36]  Geert Poels,et al.  Measuring the Perceived Semantic Quality of Information Models , 2005, ER.

[37]  Kieran Mathieson,et al.  Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[38]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Evaluating the quality of information models: empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[39]  Peter Rittgen,et al.  Negotiating Models , 2007, CAiSE.

[40]  Jan Mendling,et al.  What Makes Process Models Understandable? , 2007, BPM.

[41]  Guttorm Sindre,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework , 2002, ER.

[42]  Gary B. Shelly,et al.  Systems Analysis and Design, Seventh Edition , 2007 .

[43]  Xiaomeng Su,et al.  Using a Semiotic Framework for a Comparative Study of Ontology Languages and Tools , 2005, Information Modeling Methods and Methodologies.

[44]  Vincenzo Gervasi,et al.  Achieving quality in natural language requirements , 1998 .