IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v17y2015i6d10.1007_s10796-015-9585-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT) a cognitive view on why and how modelers benefit from structuring the process of process modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Claes

    (Ghent University
    Eindhoven University of Technology)

  • Irene Vanderfeesten

    (Eindhoven University of Technology)

  • Frederik Gailly

    (Ghent University)

  • Paul Grefen

    (Eindhoven University of Technology)

  • Geert Poels

    (Ghent University)

Abstract

After observing various inexperienced modelers constructing a business process model based on the same textual case description, it was noted that great differences existed in the quality of the produced models. The impression arose that certain quality issues originated from cognitive failures during the modeling process. Therefore, we developed an explanatory theory that describes the cognitive mechanisms that affect effectiveness and efficiency of process model construction: the Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT). This theory states that modeling accuracy and speed are higher when the modeler adopts an (i) individually fitting (ii) structured (iii) serialized process modeling approach. The SPMT is evaluated against six theory quality criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Claes & Irene Vanderfeesten & Frederik Gailly & Paul Grefen & Geert Poels, 2015. "The Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT) a cognitive view on why and how modelers benefit from structuring the process of process modeling," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1401-1425, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:17:y:2015:i:6:d:10.1007_s10796-015-9585-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-015-9585-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-015-9585-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-015-9585-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lan Xiao & Li Zheng, 2012. "Business process design: Process comparison and integration," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 363-374, April.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    3. Vijay Khatri & Iris Vessey & V. Ramesh & Paul Clay & Sung-Jin Park, 2006. "Understanding Conceptual Schemas: Exploring the Role of Application and IS Domain Knowledge," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 81-99, March.
    4. Jinwoo Kim & Jungpil Hahn & Hyoungmee Hahn, 2000. "How Do We Understand a System with (So) Many Diagrams? Cognitive Integration Processes in Diagrammatic Reasoning," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 284-303, September.
    5. Avgerou, Chrisanthi, 2000. "Information systems: what sort of science is it?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 567-579, October.
    6. Andreas Abecker & Ansgar Bernardi & Knut Hinkelmann & Otto Ku¨hn & Michael Sintek, 2000. "Context-Aware, Proactive Delivery of Task-Specific Information: The KnowMore Project," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 253-276, October.
    7. Iris Vessey & Dennis Galletta, 1991. "Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 63-84, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Panu Pihkala, 2022. "The Process of Eco-Anxiety and Ecological Grief: A Narrative Review and a New Proposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-53, December.
    2. Stefan Oppl, 0. "Evaluation of collaborative modeling processes for knowledge articulation and alignment," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-33.
    3. Ernestine Dickhaut & Mahei Manhai Li & Andreas Janson & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2022. "The role of design patterns in the development and legal assessment of lawful technologies," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 2311-2331, December.
    4. Stefan Oppl, 2017. "Evaluation of collaborative modeling processes for knowledge articulation and alignment," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 717-749, August.
    5. Jan Mendling & Jan Recker & Hajo A. Reijers & Henrik Leopold, 2019. "An Empirical Review of the Connection Between Model Viewer Characteristics and the Comprehension of Conceptual Process Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1111-1135, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bin Zhu & Stephanie A. Watts, 2010. "Visualization of Network Concepts: The Impact of Working Memory Capacity Differences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 327-344, June.
    2. Jan Mendling & Jan Recker & Hajo A. Reijers & Henrik Leopold, 2019. "An Empirical Review of the Connection Between Model Viewer Characteristics and the Comprehension of Conceptual Process Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1111-1135, October.
    3. Andrew Burton-Jones & Peter N. Meso, 2006. "Conceptualizing Systems for Understanding: An Empirical Test of Decomposition Principles in Object-Oriented Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 38-60, March.
    4. Dunn, Cheryl L. & Gerard, Gregory J. & Grabski, Severin V., 2017. "The combined effects of user schemas and degree of cognitive fit on data retrieval performance," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 46-67.
    5. Ernestine Dickhaut & Mahei Manhai Li & Andreas Janson & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2022. "The role of design patterns in the development and legal assessment of lawful technologies," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 2311-2331, December.
    6. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    7. Sunder Shyam, 2011. "Imagined Worlds of Accounting," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, January.
    8. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    9. Basile, Luigi Jesus & Carbonara, Nunzia & Pellegrino, Roberta & Panniello, Umberto, 2023. "Business intelligence in the healthcare industry: The utilization of a data-driven approach to support clinical decision making," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Loris Gaio, 2005. "A diversity-based approach to requirements tracing in new product development," ROCK Working Papers 031, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    11. B. A. Huberman & N. S. Glance, "undated". "Diversity and Collective Action," Working Papers _001, Xerox Research Park.
    12. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 225-239, September.
    13. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    14. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Gove Allen & Jeffrey Parsons, 2010. "Is Query Reuse Potentially Harmful? Anchoring and Adjustment in Adapting Existing Database Queries," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 56-77, March.
    16. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    17. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    18. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic & Michel Gutsatz, 2000. "Managerial Competencies for Organizational Flexibility: The Luxury Goods Industry between Tradition and Postmodernism," Post-Print hal-01892018, HAL.
    19. Rennard, Jean-Philippe, 2006. "Artificiality in Social Sciences," MPRA Paper 1458, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:17:y:2015:i:6:d:10.1007_s10796-015-9585-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.