Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results

Declarative approaches to business process modeling are regarded as well suited for highly volatile environments, as they enable a high degree of flexibility. However, problems in understanding and maintaining declarative process models often impede their adoption. Likewise, little research has been...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Haisjackl, Cornelia, Barba Rodríguez, Irene, Zugal, Stefan, Soffer, Pnina, Hadar, Irit, Reichert, Manfred, Pinggera, Jakob, Weber, Barbara
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2016
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Sevilla (US)
Repositorio:idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla
OAI Identifier:oai:idus.us.es:11441/127427
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/11441/127427
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-z
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Declarative process models
Empirical research
Understandability
id ES_fe6ceca092d910f575f5d263634c19f0
oai_identifier_str oai:idus.us.es:11441/127427
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical resultsHaisjackl, CorneliaBarba Rodríguez, IreneZugal, StefanSoffer, PninaHadar, IritReichert, ManfredPinggera, JakobWeber, BarbaraDeclarative process modelsEmpirical researchUnderstandabilityDeclarative approaches to business process modeling are regarded as well suited for highly volatile environments, as they enable a high degree of flexibility. However, problems in understanding and maintaining declarative process models often impede their adoption. Likewise, little research has been conducted into the understanding of declarative process models. This paper takes a first step toward addressing this fundamental question and reports on an empirical investigation consisting of an exploratory study and a follow-up study focusing on the system analysts’ sense-making of declarative process models that are specified in Declare. For this purpose, we distributed real-world Declare models to the participating subjects and asked them to describe the illustrated process and to perform a series of sense-making tasks. The results of our studies indicate that two main strategies for reading Declare models exist: either considering the execution order of the activities in the process model, or orienting by the layout of the process model. In addition, the results indicate that single constraints can be handled well by most subjects, while combinations of constraints pose significant challenges. Moreover, the study revealed that aspects that are similar in both imperative and declarative process modeling languages at a graphical level, while having different semantics, cause considerable troubles. This research not only helps guiding the future development of tools for supporting system analysts, but also gives advice on the design of declarative process modeling notations and points out typical pitfalls to teachers and educators of future systems analysts.Austrian Science Fund (FWF) P23699-N23Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación TIN2009-13714SpringerLenguajes y Sistemas InformáticosAustrian Science FoundMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación (MICIN). España2016info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/11441/127427https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-zreponame:idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevillainstname:Universidad de Sevilla (US)InglésSoftware and Systems Modeling, 15 (2), 325-352.P23699-N23TIN2009-13714https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:idus.us.es:11441/1274272026-06-17T12:51:07Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
title Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
spellingShingle Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
Haisjackl, Cornelia
Declarative process models
Empirical research
Understandability
title_short Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
title_full Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
title_fullStr Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
title_full_unstemmed Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
title_sort Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Haisjackl, Cornelia
Barba Rodríguez, Irene
Zugal, Stefan
Soffer, Pnina
Hadar, Irit
Reichert, Manfred
Pinggera, Jakob
Weber, Barbara
author Haisjackl, Cornelia
author_facet Haisjackl, Cornelia
Barba Rodríguez, Irene
Zugal, Stefan
Soffer, Pnina
Hadar, Irit
Reichert, Manfred
Pinggera, Jakob
Weber, Barbara
author_role author
author2 Barba Rodríguez, Irene
Zugal, Stefan
Soffer, Pnina
Hadar, Irit
Reichert, Manfred
Pinggera, Jakob
Weber, Barbara
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Lenguajes y Sistemas Informáticos
Austrian Science Found
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (MICIN). España
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Declarative process models
Empirical research
Understandability
topic Declarative process models
Empirical research
Understandability
description Declarative approaches to business process modeling are regarded as well suited for highly volatile environments, as they enable a high degree of flexibility. However, problems in understanding and maintaining declarative process models often impede their adoption. Likewise, little research has been conducted into the understanding of declarative process models. This paper takes a first step toward addressing this fundamental question and reports on an empirical investigation consisting of an exploratory study and a follow-up study focusing on the system analysts’ sense-making of declarative process models that are specified in Declare. For this purpose, we distributed real-world Declare models to the participating subjects and asked them to describe the illustrated process and to perform a series of sense-making tasks. The results of our studies indicate that two main strategies for reading Declare models exist: either considering the execution order of the activities in the process model, or orienting by the layout of the process model. In addition, the results indicate that single constraints can be handled well by most subjects, while combinations of constraints pose significant challenges. Moreover, the study revealed that aspects that are similar in both imperative and declarative process modeling languages at a graphical level, while having different semantics, cause considerable troubles. This research not only helps guiding the future development of tools for supporting system analysts, but also gives advice on the design of declarative process modeling notations and points out typical pitfalls to teachers and educators of future systems analysts.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/11441/127427
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-z
url https://hdl.handle.net/11441/127427
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-z
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Software and Systems Modeling, 15 (2), 325-352.
P23699-N23
TIN2009-13714
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10270-014-0435-z
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla
instname:Universidad de Sevilla (US)
instname_str Universidad de Sevilla (US)
reponame_str idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla
collection idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869425684391133185
score 15,300719

Similares en LA Referencia