Abstract
We have created a modeling approach used by people in organizations to create and discuss business process models that represent their working procedures. This is an alternative to established approaches in which process modeling experts create business process models for the organization based on input from domain experts. We have changed this by empowering the domain experts to model their business processes themselves. This approach consists of a simple to use haptic toolset and the facilitation for its application.
In the first stage of research, we showed that our approach, called tangible business process modeling (t.BPM), can be used to co-create process models with novice modelers. In a subsequent laboratory experiment, we found that t.BPM is superior to interviews for process elicitation because people are more engaged with the modeling task and the result is better validated. Furthermore, people have more fun and develop a better understanding of the process.
In current research, we developed and assessed the idea of t.BPM for application in professional environments. We are seeking to change the state of business by showing the feasibility of t.BPM for real modeling projects. We investigated when and how to apply t.BPM correctly. In doing so, we were able to show that t.BPM is mature enough to compete with established workshop techniques.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
http://www.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/d\_school/home.html
References
Baskerville RL (1997) Distinguishing action research from participative case studies. J Syst Inf Technol 1(1):S.24–S.43
Baskerville RL (1999) Investigating information systems with action research. Commun AIS 2(3es):S.4
Brydon-Miller M, Greenwood D, Maguire P (2003) Why action research? Action Res J 1(1):S.9
Davis A et al (2006) Effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques: empirical results derived from a systematic review. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, Minneapolis, pp S.179–S.188
Davison R, Martinsons MG, Kock N (2004) Principles of canonical action research. Info Syst J 14(1):S.65–S.86
Edelman J (2009) Hidden in plain sight: affordances of shared models in team based design. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on engineering design, ICED’09, Stanford, CA, USA, pp S.395–S.406
Edelman J (2011) Understanding radical breaks: media and behavior in small teams engaged in redesign scenarios. Dissertation. Stanford University
Edelman J, Grosskopf A, Weske M (2009) Tangible business process modeling: a new approach. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on engineering design, ICED’09, Stanford, CA, USA
Field AP (2009) Discovering statistics using SPSS. SAGE publications Ltd, London
Grosskopf A, Edelman J, Weske M (2009) Tangible business process modeling – methodology and experiment design. In: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on empirical research in business process management (ER-BPM’09). Springer, Ulm, pp S.53–S.64
Keller G, Nüttgens M, Scheer AW (1992) Semantische prozessmodellierung auf der grundlage “ereignisgesteuerter prozessketten (epk)”. Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik 89
Lewin K (1946) Action research and minority problems. J Soc Issues 2(4):S.34–S.46
Luebbe A (2011) Tangible business process modeling – design and evaluation of a process model elicitation technique. Dissertation, Hasso Plattner Institute for IT Systems Engineering, University of Potsdam
Luebbe A, Weske M (2010) Designing a tangible approach to business process modeling. http://ecdtr.hpi-web.de/report/2010/003/
Luebbe A, Weske M (2011a) Investigating process elicitation workshops using action research. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on empirical research in business process management (ER-BPM’11), Clermont-Ferrand, France
Luebbe A, Weske M (2011b) Tangible media in process modeling – a controlled experiment. In: Proceedings of the 23th conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE 2011), London, United Kingdom, pp S.283–S.298
Object Management Group (2011) Business process model and notation (BPMN) 2.0
Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer LJ (eds) (2010) Design thinking – understand, improve, apply. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg
Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer LJ (eds) (2011) Design thinking – studying co-creation in practice. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg
Rittgen P (2009) Collaborative modeling of business processes: a comparative case study. In: Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on applied computing, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp S.225–S.230
Rittgen P (2010) Success factors of e-collaboration in business process modeling. In: Proceedings of the 22th conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAISE 2010), Hammamet, Tunisia, pp S.24–S.37
Susman GI, Evered RD (1978) An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Adm Sci Q 23(4):S.582–S.603
Sweller J (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci 12(2):S.257–S.285
Acknowledgments
We thank Markus Guentert, the student who conducted parts of the t.BPM field studies, for his support in this research. Moreover, we are grateful to the brave men and women who tried out t.BPM in their work environment. In particular, we’d like to thank Rüdiger Molle and Claas Fischer. They were the BPM consultants confident enough to apply t.BPM in real-world projects with their clients and allowed us to observe them.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Luebbe, A., Mathias (2012). When Research Meets Practice: Tangible Business Process Modeling at Work. In: Plattner, H., Meinel, C., Leifer, L. (eds) Design Thinking Research. Understanding Innovation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31990-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31991-4
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)