Case-Based Selection of Business Process Modeling Tools: An Evaluation Criteria Framework

Modeling tools are one of the major success factors for business process management endeavors. They not only ultimately provide the modeling language to be used but also define the way of interaction when creating and using those models. Thereby, already the selection of the right modeling tool is a decisive factor for success or failure of any modeling project. Through a systematic literature review, we have identified a lack of a holistic criteria framework for the evaluation of business process modeling tools. To overcome this gap, we propose a structured evaluation criteria framework for modeling tools in this article. Our design enables an efficient selection while ensuring that all major decision factors have been considered. We evaluate our proposed framework in a real-life use case about sustainable process design for home care.

[1]  Jörg Becker,et al.  Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Modellierung , 1995, Wirtschaftsinf..

[2]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[3]  Michael Rosemann,et al.  Towards a Business Process Management Maturity Model , 2005, ECIS.

[4]  Mathias Weske,et al.  Advances in business process management , 2004, Data Knowl. Eng..

[5]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  How Many Methods Do We Need? - A Multiple Case Study Exploration into the Use of Business Process Modeling Methods in Industry , 2010, AMCIS.

[6]  Axel Winkelmann,et al.  Softwarequalität als Auswahlmerkmal: Eine empirische Untersuchung , 2007 .

[7]  Peter B. Seddon,et al.  A content-analytic study of the advantages and disadvantages of process modelling , 2003 .

[8]  Peter Mertens,et al.  Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research , 2011, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism , 1998, Inf. Syst. J..

[10]  Michael Rosemann,et al.  Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study , 2005, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[11]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[12]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[13]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Business Process Management in the Large , 2011, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[14]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Towards a pluralistic conception of research methods in information systems research , 2006 .

[15]  Oliver Thomas,et al.  Mobile Application Systems for Home Care: Requirements Analysis & Usage Potentials , 2011, AMCIS.

[16]  R. Nägele,et al.  Bewertung von Werkzeugen für das Management von Geschäftsprozessen , 2002 .

[17]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Outline of a method for designing domain-specific modelling languages , 2010 .

[18]  Islay Davies,et al.  BPM Tool Selection: The Case of the Queensland Court of Justice , 2015, Handbook on Business Process Management.

[19]  R. Iedema,et al.  Mobile IT solutions for home health care. , 2012, Advances in health care management.

[20]  Valerie Belton The Use of a Simple Multiple-Criteria Model to Assist in Selection from a Shortlist , 1985 .

[21]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[22]  Marten Schönherr,et al.  Outline of a design science research process , 2009, DESRIST.

[23]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Collaborative process modelling - tool analysis and design implications , 2011, ECIS.

[24]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process , 2009, ECIS.