Business process and rule integration approaches - An empirical analysis of model understanding

Abstract Business process models are widely used in organizations by information systems analysts to represent complex business requirements. They are also used by business users to understand business operations and constraints. This understanding is extracted from graphical process models as well as business rules. Prior research advocated integrating business rules and business process models to improve the effectiveness of various organizational activities, such as developing a shared understanding of practices, process improvement, and mitigating risks of compliance and policy breaches. However, whether such integrated modeling can improve the understanding of business processes, which is a fundamental benefit of integrated modeling, has not been empirically evaluated. In this paper, first, we report on an experiment investigating whether rule linking, a representative integrated modelling method, can improve understanding performance. We use eye tracking technology to understand the cognitive process by which model readers use models to perform understanding tasks. Our results show that rule linking outperforms separated modeling in terms of understanding effectiveness, efficiency, perceived mental effort, and visual attention. Further, cognitive process analysis reveals that the form of rule representation does not affect the extent of deep processing, but rule linking significantly decreases the occurrence of rule scanning and screening processes. Moreover, our results show that rule linking leads to an increase of visual association suggesting improved information integration, leading to improved task performance.

[1]  Jan Mendling,et al.  How visual cognition influences process model comprehension , 2017, Decis. Support Syst..

[2]  Rimantas Butleris,et al.  The Enrichment of BPMN Business Process Model with SBVR Business Vocabulary and Rules , 2012, CIT 2012.

[3]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Information Processing in Decisions Under Risk: Evidence for Compensatory Strategies Based on Automatic Processes , 2008 .

[4]  T. Gog,et al.  Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[5]  Mark Strembeck,et al.  Factors of process model comprehension - Findings from a series of experiments , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[6]  Zakaria Maamar,et al.  A Rule-Based Modeling for the Description of Flexible and Self-healing Business Processes , 2009, ADBIS.

[7]  I. Rábová Business rules specification and business processes modelling. , 2018 .

[8]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations , 2010, Inf. Syst..

[9]  Jan Recker,et al.  Empirical investigation of the usefulness of Gateway constructs in process models , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Jan Recker,et al.  Process Model Comprehension: The Effects of Cognitive Abilities, Learning Style, and Strategy , 2014, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[11]  M. Hammer,et al.  REENGINEERING THE CORPORATION: A MANIFESTO FOR BUSINESS REVOLUTION , 1995 .

[12]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  An eye‐tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes , 2011 .

[13]  Qiuzhen Wang,et al.  An eye-tracking study of website complexity from cognitive load perspective , 2014, Decis. Support Syst..

[14]  S. Zugal Applying Cognitive Psychology for Improving the Creation, Understanding and Maintenance of Business Process Models , 2013 .

[15]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The effects of information order and learning mode on schema abstraction , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[16]  D. Leutner,et al.  Direct Measurement of Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning , 2003 .

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

[18]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction , 1999 .

[19]  Markus Kohlbacher,et al.  Intuitive Comprehensibility of Process Models , 2013, S-BPM ONE.

[20]  Gerhard Knolmayer,et al.  Modeling Processes and Workflows by Business Rules , 2000, Business Process Management.

[21]  Palash Bera Does Cognitive Overload Matter in Understanding Bpmn Models? , 2012, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  Proposal of Business Process and Rules Modeling with the XTT Method , 2007, Ninth International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (SYNASC 2007).

[23]  A. Kovacic,et al.  The business rule-transformation approach , 2004, 26th International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, 2004..

[24]  Rimantas Butleris,et al.  Extending BPMN Business Process Model with SBVR Business Vocabulary and Rules , 2012, Inf. Technol. Control..

[25]  Shazia Wasim Sadiq,et al.  Modeling Control Objectives for Business Process Compliance , 2007, BPM.

[26]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory , 2003 .

[27]  Jan Mendling,et al.  A Study Into the Factors That Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[28]  P. Chandler,et al.  THE SPLIT‐ATTENTION EFFECT AS A FACTOR IN THE DESIGN OF INSTRUCTION , 1992 .

[29]  Herman Lam,et al.  Achieving dynamic inter-organizational workflow management by integrating business processes, events and rules , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[30]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Enhancing understandability of process models through cultural-dependent color adjustments , 2016, Decis. Support Syst..

[31]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[32]  Jeffrey Parsons,et al.  Using Eye Tracking to Expose Cognitive Processes in Understanding Conceptual Models , 2019, MIS Q..

[33]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Cognitive load as a local characteristic of cognitive processes: Implications for measurement approaches , 2017 .

[34]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension , 2011, Inf. Syst..

[35]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Effect of Linked Rules on Business Process Model Understanding , 2017, BPM.

[36]  Christopher J. Davis,et al.  Measuring and Explaining Cognitive Load During Design Activities: A Fine-Grained Approach , 2018 .

[37]  Jan C. Recker,et al.  BPMN Modeling - Who, Where, How and Why , 2008 .

[38]  John Krogstie,et al.  Information Systems Development Using a Combination of Process and Rule Based Approaches , 1991, CAiSE.

[39]  Gerti Kappel,et al.  Coordination in Workflow Management Systems - A Rule-Based Approach , 1996, Coordination Technology for Collaborative Applications.

[40]  Peter Meso,et al.  Conceptualizing Systems for Understanding: An Empirical Test of Decomposition Principles in Object-Oriented Analysis , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[42]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Modeling languages for business processes and business rules: A representational analysis , 2009, Inf. Syst..

[43]  Richard C. Waters,et al.  Challenges to the field of reverse engineering , 1993, [1993] Proceedings Working Conference on Reverse Engineering.

[44]  Milan Milanovic,et al.  Modeling Flexible Business Processes with Business Rule Patterns , 2011, 2011 IEEE 15th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference.

[45]  Volker Gruhn,et al.  Adopting the Cognitive Complexity Measure for Business Process Models , 2006, 2006 5th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics.

[46]  F. Paas,et al.  Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks , 1994 .

[47]  Jan Recker,et al.  Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences for process representations , 2016, Requirements Engineering.

[48]  Mark Strembeck,et al.  Influence Factors of Understanding Business Process Models , 2008, BIS.

[49]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Integrated modelling of business process models and business rules: a research agenda , 2014 .

[50]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory , 2020, Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies.

[51]  Irene T. P. Vanderfeesten,et al.  The Effect of Modularity Representation and Presentation Medium on the Understandability of Business Process Models in BPMN , 2016, BPM.

[52]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  Modeling with Rules Using Semantic Knowledge Engineering , 2017, Intelligent Systems Reference Library.

[53]  Gary Charness,et al.  Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization , 2022 .

[54]  Urs P Mosimann,et al.  Visual exploration in Parkinson's disease and Parkinson's disease dementia. , 2013, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[55]  Ekkart Kindler,et al.  On the declarative paradigm in hybrid business process representations: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature study , 2020, Inf. Syst..

[56]  Radha Nila Meghanathan,et al.  Fixation duration surpasses pupil size as a measure of memory load in free viewing , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[57]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Framework for Business Process and Rule Integration: A Case of BPMN and SBVR , 2011, BIS.

[58]  Yang Wang,et al.  Robust Multimodal Cognitive Load Measurement , 2016, Human–Computer Interaction Series.

[59]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  Formal Model of Business Processes Integrated with Business Rules , 2019, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[60]  J. S. Hunter,et al.  Statistics for experimenters : an introduction to design, data analysis, and model building , 1979 .

[61]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Cognitive and affective processes in multimedia learning , 2014 .

[62]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  A method for generation and design of business processes with business rules , 2017, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[63]  Rolf Ploetzner,et al.  What contributes to the split-attention effect? The role of text segmentation, picture labelling, and spatial proximity , 2010 .

[64]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Managing Process Model Complexity via Concrete Syntax Modifications , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[65]  Sung-Hee Kim,et al.  Does an Eye Tracker Tell the Truth about Visualizations?: Findings while Investigating Visualizations for Decision Making , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[66]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Do Process Modelling Techniques Get Better? A Comparative Ontological Analysis of BPMN , 2005 .

[67]  Eyal M. Reingold,et al.  Eye Movement Monitoring as a Process Tracing Methodology in Decision Making Research , 2011 .

[68]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Rule Based Business Process Compliance , 2012, RuleML.

[69]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[70]  Peter Dadam,et al.  On enabling integrated process compliance with semantic constraints in process management systems , 2012, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[71]  M. Rosemann,et al.  Major Issues in Business Process Management: An Australian Perspective , 2006 .

[72]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[73]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Towards integrated modeling of business processes and business rules , 2008 .

[74]  Lina Nemuraite,et al.  VETIS TOOL FOR EDITING AND TRANSFORMING SBVR BUSINESS VOCABULARIES AND BUSINESS RULES INTO UML & OCL MODELS , 2010 .

[75]  Gunter Grieser,et al.  Integration of BPM and BRM , 2011, BPMN.

[76]  Cheryl I. Johnson,et al.  An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[77]  Ron Weber,et al.  Ontological foundations of information systems , 1997 .

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

[79]  Florian Johannsen,et al.  Testing the Impact of Wand and Weber's Decomposition Model on Process Model Understandability , 2014, ICIS.

[80]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Evaluation of BPMN Models Quality - A Family of Experiments , 2008, ENASE.

[81]  Heinrich Hußmann,et al.  OCL as a Specification Language for Business Rules in Database Applications , 2001, UML.

[82]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Mental Effort , 2012 .

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

[84]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  Enriching Business Processes with Rules Using the Oryx BPMN Editor , 2012, ICAISC.

[85]  Barbara Weber,et al.  The Influence of Cognitive Abilities and Cognitive Load on Business Process Models and Their Creation , 2015 .

[86]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Generating correct EPCs from configured C-EPCs , 2006, SAC '06.

[87]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Assessing the Impact of Hierarchy on Model Understandability - A Cognitive Perspective , 2011, MoDELS.

[88]  J. Recker,et al.  Does It Matter Which Process Modelling Language We Teach or Use? An Experimental Study on Understanding Process Modelling Languages without Formal Education , 2007 .

[89]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Eye-Tracking the Factors of Process Model Comprehension Tasks , 2013, CAiSE.

[90]  Kathrin Figl Comprehension of Procedural Visual Business Process Models , 2017, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[91]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa Integrating Business Process Models with Rules , 2018 .

[92]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[93]  Marten van Sinderen,et al.  Exploiting Rules and Processes for Increasing Flexibility in Service Composition , 2010, 2010 14th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops.

[94]  Michael Burch,et al.  Evaluating visual analytics with eye tracking , 2014, BELIV.

[95]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Business Process and Rule Integration Approaches - An Empirical Analysis , 2018, BPM.

[96]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Quality Assessment of Business Process Models Based on Thresholds , 2010, OTM Conferences.

[97]  Ping-Yu Hsu,et al.  A Four Dimensional Petri Net Approach for Workflow Management , 2006, DASFAA.

[98]  Anne Helga Seltveit,et al.  Coupling Process Models and Business Rules , 1995 .

[99]  Wil M.P. van der Aalst,et al.  Pi calculus versus petri nets: let us eat humble pie rather than further inflate the Pi hype , 2005 .

[100]  Daniela Rosca,et al.  A decision making methodology in support of the business rules lifecycle , 1997, Proceedings of ISRE '97: 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering.

[101]  Grzegorz J. Nalepa,et al.  Proposal of an Inference Engine Architecture for Business Rules and Processes , 2013, ICAISC.

[102]  Ralf Laue,et al.  Influence factors for local comprehensibility of process models , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[103]  Shi Ying,et al.  Achieving business process and business rules integration using SPL , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Future Information Technology and Management Engineering.

[104]  Stefano Ceri,et al.  Designing Database Applications with Objects and Rules: The IDEA Methodology , 1997 .

[105]  Laura Bocchi,et al.  From BPEL to SRML: A Formal Transformational Approach , 2007, WS-FM.

[106]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Sensemaking in Dual Artefact Tasks - The Case of Business Process Models and Business Rules , 2020, ER.

[107]  Giuseppe Lo Re,et al.  A Methodology for Graphical Modeling of Business Rules , 2011, 2011 UKSim 5th European Symposium on Computer Modeling and Simulation.