[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Eliciting Process Knowledge Through Process Stories

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are often gaps between the lived experiences of end users and the official version of processes as espoused by the organization. To understand and address these gaps, we propose and evaluate process stories, a method to capture knowledge from end users based on organizational storytelling and visual narrative theories. The method addresses two dimensions related to business processes: 1) coordination knowledge, explaining how activities enfold over time; and 2) contextual knowledge, explaining how coordination depends on other contingency factors. The method is evaluated by comparing process stories against process models officially supported by the participating organizations. The results suggest that process stories identify more activities, events, and actors than official processes, which are supported by a diversity of contextual elements. We then qualitatively analyse these elements to identify the contributions of process stories to process knowledge. Based on the quantitative and qualitative analysis, we draw several implications for business process management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguilar-Saven, R. (2004). Business process modelling: review and framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 90(2), 129–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alotaibi, Y., & Liu, F. (2017). Survey of business process management: challenges and solutions. Enterprise Information Systems, 11(8), 1119–1153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastassiu, M., Santoro, F., Recker, J., & Rosemann, M. (2016). The quest for organizational flexibility: driving changes in business processes through the identification of relevant context. Business Process Management Journal, 22(4), 763–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antunes, P., Simões, D., Carriço, L., & Pino, J. (2013). An end-user approach to business process modeling. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 36(6), 1466–1479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augusto, A., Conforti, R., Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., & Bruno, G. (2016). Automated discovery of structured process models: Discover structured vs. discover and structure. International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (pp. 313-329). Springer.

  • Aysolmaz, B., Brown, R., Bruza, P., & Reijers, H. (2016). A 3D visualization approach for process training in office environments. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems - OTM Confederated International Conferences (pp. 418-436). Springer.

  • Baghdadi, Y. (2014). Modelling business process with services: towards agile enterprises. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 15(4), 410–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandara, M., Rabhi, F., & Meymandpour, R. (2018). Semantic model based approach for knowledge intensive processes. International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination (pp. 215-229). Cham: Springer.

  • Becker, J., Clever, N., Holler, J., & Neumann, M. (2018). Business process management in the manufacturing industry: ERP replacement and ISO 9001 recertification supported by the icebricks method. Business Process Management Cases (pp. 413-429). Springer.

  • Beverungen, D. (2014). Exploring the interplay of the design and emergence of business processes as organizational routines. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 191–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biazzo, S. (2000). Approaches to business process analysis: a review. Business Process Management Journal, 6(2), 99–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnet, F., Decker, G., Dugan, L., Kurz, M., Misiak, Z. & Ringuette, S. (2014). Making BPMN a true lingua franca, BPM Trends ---> Online article www.bptrends.com. June 2014.

  • Boyce, M. (1996). Organizational story and storytelling: a critical review. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(5), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brambilla, M., Fraternali, P., & Vaca, C. (2012). BPMN and design patterns for engineering social BPM solutions. In F. Daniel, K. Barkaoui, & S. Dustdar (Eds.), BPM 2011 International Workshops, Clermont-Ferrand, France, August 29, 2011 (pp. 219–230). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., Rinderle-Ma, S., Kriglstein, S., & Kabicher-Fuchs, S. (2014). Augmenting and assisting model elicitation tasks with 3D virtual world context metadata. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014 Conferences. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 8841, pp. 39-56). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Bruno, G., Dengler, F., Jennings, B., Khalaf, R., Nurcan, S., Prilla, M., Sarini, M., Schmidt, R., & Silva, A. (2011). Key challenges for enabling agile BPM with social software. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 23(4), 297–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton-Jones, A., Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, P., & Weber, R. (2017). Assessing representation theory with a framework for pursuing success and failure. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1307–1334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabitza, F., & Simone, C. (2013). “Drops hollowing the stone”: Workarounds as resources for better task-artifact fit. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 103–122). London: Springer.

  • Cabitza, F., & Simone, C. (2015). Building socially embedded technologies: Implications about design. Designing socially embedded technologies in the real-world (pp. 217–270). London: Springer.

  • Catricalà, M., & Guidi, A. (2015). Onomatopoeias: a new perspective around space, image schemas and phoneme clusters. Cognitive Processing, 16(1), 175–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2005). In J. Davis, E. Subrahmanian, & A. Westerberg (Eds.), A Sensemaking theory of knowledge in organizations and its application. Knowledge management: Organizational and technological dimensions (pp. 55–74). New York: Physica-Verlag.

  • Cereja, J., Santoro, F., Gorbacheva, E., & Matzner, M. (2017). Application of the design thinking approach to process redesign at an insurance company in Brazil. In J. Vom Brocke & J. Mendling (Eds.). Business process management cases: Digital innovation and business transformation in practice. Springer.

  • Clerke, T., & Hopwood, N. (2014). Ethnography as Collective Research Endeavor. Doing Ethnography in Teams (pp. 5–18). Cham: Springer.

  • Cohn, N. (2013). Visual narrative structure. Cognitive Science, 37(3), 413–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohn, N., Paczynski, M., Jackendoff, R., Holcomb, P., & Kuperberg, G. (2012). (Pea) nuts and bolts of visual narrative: Structure and meaning in sequential image comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 65(1), 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D., & Mandran, N. (2016). Evaluating the appropriateness of the BPMN 2.0 standard for modeling service choreographies: using an extended quality framework. Software and Systems Modeling, 15(1), 219–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, J. (2016). Narrative theory and the dynamics of popular movies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(6), 1713–1743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davey, B., & Cope, C. (2008). Requirements elicitation–What’s missing? Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5, 543–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Oca, I., Snoeck, M., Reijers, H., & Rodríguez-Morffi, A. (2015). A systematic literature review of studies on business process modeling quality. Information and Software Technology, 58, 187–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Waal, B., & Batenburg, R. (2014). The process and structure of user participation: a BPM system implementation case study. Business Process Management Journal, 20(1), 107–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Winter, J. (2013). Using the Student’s t-test with extremely small sample sizes. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(10).

  • Denning, S. (2006). Effective storytelling: strategic business narrative techniques. Strategy & Leadership, 34(1), 42–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieste, O., & Juristo, N. (2011). Systematic review and aggregation of empirical studies on elicitation techniques. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 37(2), 283–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorn, C., Dustdar, S., & Osterweil, L. (2014). Specifying flexible human behavior in interaction-intensive process environments. International Conference on Business Process Management (pp. 366–373). Springer.

  • Dumas, M., la Rosa, M., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. (2013). Fundamentals of business process management. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, W. (1978). Toward a logic of good reasons. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64(4), 376–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, W. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: the case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Obermeier, S., & Borger, E. (2012). Subject-oriented business process management. Heidelberg New York: Springer.

  • Front, A., Rieu, D., Santorum, M., & Movahedian, F. (2017). A participative end-user method for multi-perspective business process elicitation and improvement. Software and Systems Modeling, 16(3), 691–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, M., Harrer, S., Lenhard, J., & Wirtz, G. (2017). BPMN 2.0: The state of support and implementation. Future Generation Computer Systems, 80, 250–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grau, C., & Moormann, J. (2014). Investigating the relationship between process management and organizational culture: literature review and research agenda. Management and Organizational Studies, 1(2), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., & Recker, J. (2011). Complementary use of modeling grammars. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 23(1), 59–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, J., Brown, R., Johnson, D., Rinderle-Ma, S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2015). Virtual business role-play: Leveraging familiar environments to prime stakeholder memory during process elicitation. Advanced information systems engineering (pp. 166–180). Springer.

  • Harman, J., Brown, R., Johnson, D., Rinderle-Ma, S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2016). Augmenting process elicitation with visual priming: an empirical exploration of user behaviour and modelling outcomes. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 62, 242–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., & Wynn, M. (2016). Normative requirements for regulatory compliance: an abstract formal framework. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(3), 429–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, A., & Davis, A. (2004). A unified model of requirements elicitation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(4), 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppenbrouwers, S., Wilmont, I., van Loon, D., van der Geest, T. & Oppl, S. (2018). Measuring process experience: A collaborative modelling instrument for determining the impact of a new law on public service experience. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. New York, ACM.

  • Janiesch, C., & Kuhlenkamp, J. (2018). Enhancing business process execution with a context engine. Business Process Management Journal.

  • Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J., & Feldman, M. (2012). Toward a theory of coordinating: creating coordinating mechanisms in practice. Organization Science, 23(4), 907–927.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeyaraj, A. (2010). Business process elicitation, modeling, and reengineering: teaching and learning with simulated environments. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. (2001). Toward a new classification of nonexperimental quantitative research. Educational Researcher, 30(2), 3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M., Christensen, C., & Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review, 86(12), 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannengiesser, U., Totter, A., & Bonaldi, D. (2014). An interactional view of context in business processes. S-BPM ONE application studies (pp. 42–54).

  • Kolar, J., & Pitner, T. (2013). Agile BPM in the age of cloud technologies. Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience, 13(4), 285–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, U., Linhart, A., & Röglinger, M. (2018). Why do business processes deviate? Results from a Delphi study. Business Research, 1–29.

  • Leyh, C., Bley, K., & Seek, S. (2017). Elicitation of processes in business process management in the era of digitization–the same techniques as decades ago? International Conference on Enterprise Resource Planning Systems (pp. 42–56). Cham: Springer.

  • Malinova, M., & Mendling, J. (2013). A qualitative research perspective on BPM adoption and the pitfalls of business process modeling. In M. La Rosa & P. Soffer (Eds.), Business process management workshops (Vol. 132, pp. 77–88). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinova, M., Hribar, B., & Mendling, J. (2014). A framework for assessing BPM success. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. Tel Aviv, Israel: AIS.

  • Marzec, M. (2007). Telling the corporate story: vision into action. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(1), 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., Huberman, A., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

  • Milton, S., & Johnson, L. (2012). Service blueprinting and BPMN: a comparison. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 22(6), 606–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S., & Dennehy, R. (1997). The power of organizational storytelling: a management development perspective. Journal of Management Development, 16(7), 494–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J. (1999). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nolte, A., Brown, R., Poppe, E., & Anslow, C. (2015). Towards collaborative modelling of business processes on large interactive touch display walls. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Interactive Tabletops & Surfaces (pp. 379–384). ACM.

  • Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. New York: Basic books.

  • OMG. (2010). BPMN 2.0 by Example (dtc/2010-06-02). Object Management Group.

  • OMG. (2011). Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0 (formal/2011-01-03). Object Management Group.

  • Oppl, S. (2015). Articulation of subject-oriented business process models. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. New York: ACM.

  • Oppl, S. (2016). Articulation of work process models for organizational alignment and informed information system design. Information & Management, 53(5), 591–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppl, S., & Alexopoulou, N. (2016). Linking natural modeling to techno-centric modeling for the active involvement of process participants in business process design. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design, 7(2), 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppl, S., & Stary, C. (2014). Facilitating shared understanding of work situations using a tangible tabletop interface. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(6), 619–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, A., Berry, L., & Zeithaml, V. (1991). Understanding customer expectations of service. Sloan Management Review, 32(3), 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passera, S., Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2017). Diagrams in contracts: Fostering understanding in global business communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(2), 118–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedrinaci, C., Domingue, J., & Medeiros, A. (2008). A core ontology for business process analysis. European Semantic Web Conference (pp. 49–64). Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Pentland, B., Recker, J. & Kim, I. (2017). Capturing reality in flight? Empirical tools for strong process theory. Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems, Seoul.

  • Poppe, E., Brown, R., Recker, J., Johnson, D., & Vanderfeesten, I. (2017). Design and evaluation of virtual environments mechanisms to support remote collaboration on complex process diagrams. Information Systems, 66, 59–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, D. (2009). Apt performance and epistemic value. Philosophical Studies, 143(3), 407–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., & Mendling, J. (2016). The state of the art of business process management research as published in the BPM conference. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 58(1), 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., Indulska, M., Rosemann, M., & Green, P. (2010). The ontological deficiencies of process modeling in practice. European Journal of Information Systems, 19, 501–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P., & Indulska, M. (2011). Do ontological deficiencies in modeling grammars matter? MIS Quarterly, 35, 57–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichert, M., & Weber, B. (2012a). Enabling flexibility in process-aware information systems: Challenges, methods, technologies. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichert, M., & Weber, B. (2012b). Process-aware information systems. Enabling flexibility in process-aware information systems (pp. 9–42). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Renger, M., Kolfschoten, G., & De Vreede, G. (2008). Challenges in collaborative modelling: a literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling, 4(3–4), 248–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riemer, K., Johnston, R., Hovorka, D. & Indulska, M. (2013). Challenging the philosophical foundations of modeling organizational reality: the case of process modeling. Thirty Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Milan, Italy.

  • Rosa, M., Van der Aalst, W., Dumas, M., & Milani, F. (2017). Business process variability modeling: a survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 50(1), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann, M., & Green, P. (2002). Developing a meta model for the Bunge–Wand–Weber ontological constructs. Information Systems, 27(2), 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann, M. & Recker, J. 2006. Context-aware process design: Exploring the extrinsic drivers for process flexibility. The 18th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering: Namur University Press, pp. 149-158.

  • Rosemann, M., Recker, J., Flender, C. & Ansell, P. 2006. Understanding context-awareness in business process design. In: Proceedings of 17th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, S. Spencer and A. Jenkins (eds.). Adelaide, Australia: p. 79.

  • Ryan, K., & Ko, L. (2009). A computer scientist’s introductory guide to business process management (BPM). Crossroads, 15(4).

  • Silva, A., & Rosemann, M. (2012). Processpedia: an ecological environment for BPM stakeholders’ collaboration. Business Process Management Journal, 18(1), 20–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simões, D., Antunes, P., & Cranefield, J. (2016). Enriching knowledge in business process modelling: A storytelling approach. In L. Razmerita, G. Phillips-Wren, & L. Jain (Eds.), Innovations in knowledge management: The impact of social media, semantic web and cloud computing (Vol. 95, pp. 241–267). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simões, D., Antunes, P., & Carriço, L. (2018). Eliciting and modelling business process stories: a case study. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(2), 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tate, M., & Johnstone, D. (2011). ICT, multi-channels and the changing line of visibility: An empirical study. e-Service Journal: A Journal of Electronic Services in the Public and Private Sectors, 7(2), 66–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tregear, R. (2015). Business process standardization. Handbook on business process management 2 (pp. 421–441). Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Van der Aalst, W. (2011). Process discovery: An introduction. Process Mining (pp. 125–156). Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Van der Aalst, W. (2013). Business process management: A comprehensive survey," ISRN Software Engineering.

  • Van der Aalst, W., Hofstede, A., & Kiepuszewski, B. (2003). Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 14, 5–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Aalst, W., La Rosa, M., & Santoro, F. (2016). Business process management. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 58(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Fraassen, B. (2010). Scientific representation: paradoxes of perspective. Analysis, 70(3), 511–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vom Brocke, J., & Mendling, J. (2018). Frameworks for business process management: a taxonomy for business process management cases. Business Process Management Cases (pp. 1–17). Springer.

  • Vom Brocke, J., Zelt, S., & Schmiedel, T. (2016). On the role of context in business process management. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 486–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., & Wang, H. (2006). From process logic to business logic—A cognitive approach to business process management. Information & Management, 43(2), 179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W., Indulska, M., & Sadiq, S. (2018). Guidelines for business rule modeling decisions. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 58(4), 363–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigand, H., Van den Heuvel, W., & Hiel, M. (2011). Business policy compliance in service-oriented systems. Information Systems, 36(4), 791–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieland, M., Nicklas, D., & Leymann, F. (2011). Benefits of business process context for human task management. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 2(4), 304.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, 6140, New Zealand

    Pedro Antunes

  2. Computer Science Department, Universidad de Chile, Casilla, 2777, Santiago, Chile

    Jose A. Pino

  3. School of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD, 4001, Australia

    Mary Tate & Alistair Barros

Authors
  1. Pedro Antunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jose A. Pino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary Tate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alistair Barros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro Antunes.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Antunes, P., Pino, J.A., Tate, M. et al. Eliciting Process Knowledge Through Process Stories. Inf Syst Front 22, 1179–1201 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09922-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09922-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation