首页> 外文学位 >The effects of business process management cognitive resources and individual cognitive differences on outcomes of user comprehension.
【24h】

The effects of business process management cognitive resources and individual cognitive differences on outcomes of user comprehension.

机译:业务流程管理认知资源和个人认知差异对用户理解结果的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

There is a growing need to study factors that affect user comprehension of Business Process Management (BPM) information portrayed by graphical process models (GPMs). For example, deployment of BPM Systems, unique types of enterprise-level information systems, has dramatically increased in recent years. This increase is primarily because BPM Systems give a variety of managers across an enterprise the ability to directly design, configure, enact, monitor, diagnose, and control business processes that other types of enterprise systems do not. This is possible because BPM Systems uniquely rely on GPMs derived from formal graph theory. Besides controlling the business processes, these GPMs, such as metagraphs and Unified Modeling Language (UML) diagrams, portray business process information (BPI) and prompt BPM managers to apply their training and expertise to deal with BPM situations. As a result, GPMs are the primary information artifacts for decision-making and communication among different, often geographically dispersed stakeholders.; Therefore, user comprehension of these unique GPMs is critical to the efficient and effective development, deployment, and utilization of BPM Systems. User comprehension outcomes are jointly affected by the (1) BPM cognitive resources available to each manager (including the type of GPM, BPI, and user educational training and experience), and (2) cognitive differences between individual BPM managers (such as their mental workload, cognitive styles and cognitive abilities). Although research has studied GPMs in various contexts, there is apparently no empirical research investigating GPM user comprehension in the context of BPM Systems. This research makes an important contribution by addressing this gap in the literature.; Statement of the objective. The purpose of this research is to empirically study how BPM cognitive resources and cognitive differences between individuals affect outcomes of GPM user comprehension. This research centered on the following objectives: (A.) Investigate whether more positive user comprehension outcomes are produced by novice users if a single GPM technique is used to portray different types of BPI (e.g., as with metagraphs) or if different GPM techniques are used to portray different types of BPI (e.g., as with UML diagrams). (B.) Investigate whether one type of BPI is more easily comprehended and interpreted by novice users irrespective of the type of GPM or the type of educational training of the user. (C.) Investigate whether users with a specific type of user educational training can more easily comprehend and interpret BPM information irrespective of the type of GPM or the type of BPI. (D.) Evaluate influences of individual cognitive differences (i.e., mental workload, cognitive styles, and cognitive abilities) on outcomes of user comprehension.; In order to accomplish these objectives, this study: (a) defined a theoretical framework conceptualizing user comprehension outcomes in terms of the interaction between cognitive resources external to the user and individual differences affecting how users cognitively process BPI, (b) empirically tested an operational research model of GPM user comprehension that is based on the theoretical framework, and (c) interpreted the experimental results in the context of related literatures.; Description of research methods. This study empirically tested relationships between several variables representing BPM cognitive resources and individual cognitive differences hypothesized as influencing the outcomes of user comprehension. A laboratory experiment, involving 87 upper-level undergraduate students from two universities, analyzed relationships between participant comprehension of two types of GPMs (i.e., metagraphs and UML diagrams) used to portray three types of BPI (i.e., task-centric, resource-centric, and information-centric BPI) by novice GPM users possessing different educational training (
机译:越来越需要研究影响用户对由图形流程模型(GPM)描绘的业务流程管理(BPM)信息的理解的因素。例如,近年来,BPM系统(一种独特类型的企业级信息系统)的部署急剧增加。增长的主要原因是BPM Systems使整个企业中的各种管理人员能够直接设计,配置,执行,监视,诊断和控制其他类型的企业系统没有的业务流程。这是可能的,因为BPM Systems独特地依赖于形式图理论衍生的GPM。除了控制业务流程外,这些GPM(例如元图和统一建模语言(UML)图),描绘业务流程信息(BPI)并提示BPM经理运用他们的培训和专业知识来处理BPM情况。因此,GPM是主要决策者之间进行决策和交流的主要信息工件。因此,用户对这些独特的GPM的理解对于BPM系统的有效开发,部署和利用至关重要。用户的理解结果受以下因素共同影响:(1)每个管理者可用的BPM认知资源(包括GPM,BPI的类型以及用户的教育培训和经验),以及(2)各个BPM管理者之间的认知差异(例如他们的心理工作量,认知方式和认知能力)。尽管研究已经在各种情况下研究了GPM,但是显然没有实证研究在BPM Systems的背景下研究GPM用户理解。通过解决文献中的这一空白,这项研究做出了重要的贡献。陈述目标。这项研究的目的是根据经验研究BPM认知资源和个人之间的认知差异如何影响GPM用户理解的结果。这项研究集中于以下目标:(A.)研究如果使用单个GPM技术来描绘不同类型的BPI(例如,通过元数据)或使用不同的GPM技术,则新手用户是否会产生更积极的用户理解结果用于描绘不同类型的BPI(例如,与UML图一样)。 (B.)研究新手用户是否更容易理解和解释一种BPI,而不论GPM的类型或用户的教育培训的类型如何。 (C.)调查接受特定类型的用户教育培训的用户是否可以更容易地理解和解释BPM信息,而与GPM类型或BPI类型无关。 (D.)评估个人认知差异(即心理工作量,认知方式和认知能力)对用户理解结果的影响;为了实现这些目标,本研究:(a)定义了一个理论框架,根据用户外部认知资源与影响用户认知方式处理BPI方式的个体差异之间的相互作用来概念化用户理解结果;(b)以经验方式测试运营基于理论框架的GPM用户理解研究模型,以及(c)在相关文献的背景下解释了实验结果。研究方法的说明。这项研究以经验方式测试了代表BPM认知资源的多个变量与假设影响用户理解结果的个体认知差异之间的关系。一项来自两所大学的87名高年级本科生的实验室实验分析了参与者对两种GPM(即元数据和UML图)的理解之间的关系,这些GPM用于描绘三种类型的BPI(即以任务为中心,以资源为中心) ,以及以信息为中心的BPI)由拥有不同教育培训的GPM新手用户(

著录项

  • 作者

    Swan, Bret R.;

  • 作者单位

    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.;

  • 授予单位 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.;
  • 学科 Business Administration Management.; Engineering Industrial.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2007
  • 页码 436 p.
  • 总页数 436
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 贸易经济;一般工业技术;
  • 关键词

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