Business process model and notation: The current state of affairs

Context: With business process modelling, companies and organizations can gain explicit control over their processes. Currently, there are many notations in the area of business process modelling, where Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) is denoted as the de facto standard. Aims: The aim of this research is to provide the state-of-the-art results addressing the acceptance of BPMN, while also examining the purposes of its usage. Furthermore, the advantages, disadvantages and other interests related to BPMN were also investigated. Method: To achieve these objectives, a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and a semantic examination of articles’ citations was conducted. Results: After completing SLR, out of a total of 852 articles, 31 were deemed relevant. The majority of the articles analyzed the notation and compared it with other modelling techniques. The remainder evaluated general aspects of the notation, e.g. history and versions of the standard, usage of the notation or tools. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that there are empirical insights about the level of BPMN acceptance. They suggest that BPMN is still widely perceived as the de facto standard in the process modelling domain and its usage is everincreasing. However, many studies report that only a limited set of elements are commonly used and to this end, several extensions were proposed. The main purpose of BPMN remains the description of business processes.

[1]  Jan Recker,et al.  The measurement of perceived ontological deficiencies of conceptual modeling grammars , 2010, Data Knowl. Eng..

[2]  Milan Milanovic,et al.  Combining Rules and Activities for Modeling Service-Based Business Processes , 2008, 2008 12th Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops.

[3]  Gero Decker,et al.  Extending BPMN for Modeling Complex Choreographies , 2007, OTM Conferences.

[4]  Jan Recker,et al.  "Modeling with tools is easier, believe me" - The effects of tool functionality on modeling grammar usage beliefs , 2012, Inf. Syst..

[5]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain , 2007, J. Syst. Softw..

[6]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering , 2006, ICSE.

[7]  Gero Decker,et al.  A Graphical Notation for Modeling Complex Events in Business Processes , 2007, 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007).

[8]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Sometimes Less is More: Are Process Modeling Languages Overly Complex? , 2007, 2007 Eleventh International IEEE EDOC Conference Workshop.

[9]  Jan Recker,et al.  How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation , 2008, CAiSE.

[10]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Do Ontological Deficiencies in Modeling Grammars Matter? , 2011, MIS Q..

[11]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: effects of different calculation methods , 2010, Scientometrics.

[12]  John Krogstie,et al.  Analysis and Design of Business Processes Using BPMN , 2010 .

[13]  Jan Recker,et al.  Representation Theory Versus Workflow Patterns - The Case of BPMN , 2006, ER.

[14]  Mario Piattini,et al.  A BPMN Extension for the Modeling of Security Requirements in Business Processes , 2007, IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Maribel Yasmina Santos,et al.  From Business Process Modeling to Data Model: A Systematic Approach , 2012, 2012 Eighth International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology.

[16]  Jan Recker,et al.  Opportunities and constraints: the current struggle with BPMN , 2010, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[17]  Klaus Kruczynski.  Business process modelling in the context of SOA – an empirical study of the acceptance between EPC and BPMN , 2010 .

[18]  Marta Indulska,et al.  A Study of the Evolution of the Representational Capabilities of Process Modeling Grammars , 2006, CAiSE.

[19]  Wolfgang Reisig.  Remarks on Egon Börger: “Approaches to model business processes: a critical analysis of BPMN, workflow patterns and YAWL, SOSYM 11:305–318” , 2012, Software & Systems Modeling.

[20]  Ben Soh,et al.  A Novel Design Framework for Business Process Modelling in Automotive Industry , 2010, 2010 Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Electronic Design, Test & Applications.

[21]  Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle,et al.  BPMN MUSIM: Approach to improve the domain expert's efficiency in business processes modeling for the generation of specific software applications , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[22]  Jan Recker,et al.  Explaining usage of process modeling grammars: Comparing three theoretical models in the study of two grammars , 2010, Inf. Manag..

[23]  Varun Rao,et al.  Configurable Business Process Modeling Notation , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC).

[24]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Business Process Modeling- A Comparative Analysis , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Bill Bretherton.  What we know and what we don't know , 2009 .

[26]  Jan Recker,et al.  Continued use of process modeling grammars: the impact of individual difference factors , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Marta Indulska,et al.  DO ONTOLOGICAL DEFICIENCIES IN MODELING GRAMMARS MATTER? 1 , 2011 .

[28]  Jacques H. Trienekens,et al.  Process modelling in demand-driven supply chains: A reference model for the fruit industry , 2010 .

[29]  Paulo Veríssimo,et al.  Handling self-citations using Google Scholar , 2009 .

[30]  Matteo Magnani,et al.  BPMN: How Much Does It Cost? An Incremental Approach , 2007, BPM.

[31]  Marta Indulska,et al.  The ontological deficiencies of process modeling in practice , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Sven Overhage,et al.  Is BPMN Really First Choice in Joint Architecture Development? An Empirical Study on the Usability of BPMN and UML Activity Diagrams for Business Users , 2010, QoSA.

[33]  Egon Börger,et al.  Approaches to modeling business processes: a critical analysis of BPMN, workflow patterns and YAWL , 2011, Software & Systems Modeling.

[34]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - A systematic literature review , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[35]  Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle,et al.  SBPMN - An easier business process modeling notation for business users , 2010, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[36]  Daniel Ritter,et al.  Building a Business Graph System and Network Integration Model Based on BPMN , 2011, BPMN.

[37]  Jan Mendling,et al.  A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[38]  Bill Curtis,et al.  Process modeling , 1992, CACM.

[39]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Making sense of business process descriptions: An experimental comparison of graphical and textual notations , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..

[40]  Rebecca Bulander,et al.  A conceptual framework of serious games for higher education: Conceptual framework of the game INNOV8 to train students in business process modelling , 2010, 2010 International Conference on e-Business (ICE-B).

[41]  Richard Müller,et al.  BPMN for Healthcare Processes , 2011, ZEUS.

[42]  T. Davenport.  The coming commoditization of processes. , 2005, Harvard business review.

[43]  Alberto Trombetta,et al.  BPMN: An introduction to the standard , 2012, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.