首页> 外文会议>Americas conference on information systems;AMCIS 2009 >Is BPMN the Better UML for Domain Experts? Discussion, Evaluation, and Comparison - An Empirical Study
【24h】

Is BPMN the Better UML for Domain Experts? Discussion, Evaluation, and Comparison - An Empirical Study

机译:BPMN是针对领域专家的更好的UML吗?讨论,评估和比较-实证研究

获取原文

摘要

The increased demand for a more comprehensive approach to Business Process Management, amongst others, led to the development of the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) as a proposed industry standard. Today, BPMN has not only become popular, it has also been adopted by the Object Management Group (OMG) as core standard to create a new business modeling framework. The OMG intentionally decided not to build upon the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and its process modeling notation - the Activity Diagram (AD) -, because BPMN was presumed to be more applicable by domain experts. Consolidated findings in this direction, however, are missing. In this paper, we present results from an em-pirical study, in which the application of BPMN and AD by domain experts was examined. Based on a comparative discus-sion of BPMN and AD, we describe the study design and highlight central outcomes which are then being evaluated in detail. This evaluation leads to an extensive comparison of the applicability of BPMN and AD based on empirical indications.
机译:对更全面的业务流程管理方法的需求不断增长,导致开发了业务流程建模表示法(BPMN)作为拟议的行业标准。如今,BPMN不仅变得流行,而且还被对象管理组(OMG)采纳为创建新业务建模框架的核心标准。 OMG故意决定不建立在统一建模语言(UML)及其过程建模表示法(活动图(AD))的基础上,因为领域专家认为BPMN更适用。但是,缺少在这个方向上的综合发现。在本文中,我们提供了来自实证研究的结果,其中研究了领域专家对BPMN和AD的应用。在对BPMN和AD进行比较讨论的基础上,我们描述了研究设计并强调了主要结果,然后对这些结果进行了详细评估。该评估基于经验指标对BPMN和AD的适用性进行了广泛的比较。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号