How novices design business processes

Don't overthink it: The paradoxical nature of expertise for the detection of errors in conceptual business process models

Business process models are widely used artifacts in design activities to facilitate communication about business domains and processes. Despite being an extensively researched topic, some aspects of conceptual business modeling are yet to be fully explored and understood by academicians and practitioners alike. We study the attentional characteristics specific to experts and novices in a semantic and syntactic error detection task across 75 Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models. We find several intriguing results. Experts correctly identify more error-free models than novices, but also tend to find more false positive defects. Syntactic errors are diagnosed faster than semantic errors by both groups. Both groups spend more time on error-free models. Our findings regarding the ambiguous differences between experts and novices highlight the paradoxical nature of expertise and the need to further study how best to train business analysts to design and evaluate conceptual models.

The impact of working memory and the "process of process modelling" on model quality: Investigating experienced versus inexperienced modellers

A process model (PM) represents the graphical depiction of a business process, for instance, the entire process from online ordering a book until the parcel is delivered to the customer. Knowledge about relevant factors for creating PMs of high quality is lacking. The present study investigated the role of cognitive processes as well as modelling processes in creating a PM in experienced and inexperienced modellers. Specifically, two working memory (WM) functions (holding and processing of information and relational integration) and three process of process modelling phases (comprehension, modelling, and reconciliation) were related to PM quality. Our results show that the WM function of relational integration was positively related to PM quality in both modelling groups. The ratio of comprehension phases was negatively related to PM quality in inexperienced modellers and the ratio of reconciliation phases was positively related to PM quality in experienced modellers. Our research reveals central cognitive mechanisms in process modelling and has potential practical implications for the development of modelling software and teaching the craft of process modelling.