<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Repeated Use of Process Models: The Impact of Artifact, Technological and Individual Factors (Extended Abstract)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alexander Nolte</string-name>
          <email>nolte@iaw.ruhr-uni-bochum.de</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Eike Bernhard</string-name>
          <email>e.bernhard@hdr.qut.edu.au</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jan Recker</string-name>
          <email>j.recker@qut.edu.au</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Fabian Pittke</string-name>
          <email>fabian.pittke@wu.ac.at</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jan Mendling</string-name>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Business process modeling has received a lot of attention from practitioners and researchers alike. Organizations make significant investments into process modeling in terms of training, tools and resources. Yet, having invested into creating large process model collections, process models often fall into disuse, provoking the impression that the initial investment has been lost. In this paper we present a summary of a study on factors that facilitate or hinder the repeated use of process models by individual users. Results from that study indicate the importance of quality and ease of understanding of process models to repeated use, alongside individual factors, such as motivation and individual expertise. We also identified means that support organizations in promoting repeated process model use. The work summarized in this extended abstract has been published in [No16]. In this paper we present summarized results from a study on factors that influence an individuals´ intention to repeatedly use process models and on means to foster repeated use. These results were reported in an article for the Decision Support Systems journal in June 2016. This paper provides a short overview of the approach as well as the results. For a full account of the research we would like to encourage the reader to refer to the respective journal paper [No16]. Studying factors that influence an individuals´ intention to repeatedly use process models is of relevance for research and practice alike since many organizations commit ongoing investments in creating large process model collections [Ra06]. Afterwards organizations are oftentimes faced with the problem that models fall into disuse which means that investments taken to create them are at the risk of being lost. Repeated use has been identified as a key challenge in order for process modeling to be beneficial [In09]. We subsequently conducted a study aiming at identifying antecedents of individual repeated use behavior. There is a substantial body of literature that focusses on technical aspects of process</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Process Modeling</kwd>
        <kwd>Repeated Use</kwd>
        <kwd>Value of Process Modeling</kwd>
        <kwd>Intentions for Repeated Use</kwd>
        <kwd>Survey</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>model re-use. In this field however re-use is understood as applying some fragments of a
model or an entire existing model [Ko14] in the creation of a new or revised model.
Discussions include, for instance, various types of re-use patterns [Th08]. Behavioral
aspects of repeated process model use however have not been studies so far. In
particular, questions of when and why a particular act of repeated model use is
happening remain unanswered.</p>
      <p>In order to close this gap we first developed a theoretical model of factors that might
impact and individuals´ intention to repeatedly use a process model (section 2). Based on
this model we created a questionnaire using established measures from literature,
conducted a pretest and ran a study in one large representative organization (section 3).
Results from this research are reported in section 4.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Theoretical model and background</title>
      <p>We started our conceptualization by first defining our phenomenon of interest – repeated
process models use – as “the extent to which a process model is employed again by an
individual user to perform a task” [No13]. Repeated use in this context thus describes a
knowledge seeking behavior rather an actual modeling task.</p>
      <p>Based on this conceptualization we conducted an analysis of existing literature in order
to identify factors that could potentially promote or hinder an individual´s intention to
repeatedly use a process model. Due to the lack of empirical research on repeated
process model use we extended our review to information artifacts and information
seeking behavior. This included literature on knowledge re-use as well as more
technologically centered scenarios such as software re-use, code re-use and database
query re-use. We also considered literature concerned with factors that influence
repurchase intentions which have extensively been studied in the field of marketing. In
total we identified the following groups of factors to have a direct positive effect on an
individuals´ intention to repeatedly use a process model:
•
•</p>
      <p>Artifact factors: Repeated use will depend on the properties of the process model
that is being repeatedly used. These properties include the fit of the process model
to a task the user is aiming at repeatedly using it for, a users´ perception about the
quality of the process model, her perception of the usefulness of a process model,
her perception about how easy it is for her to interpret this process model and
finally her previous satisfaction when using process models.</p>
      <p>Individual factors: We perceive repeated process model use as an individual
knowledge seeking behavior and it is thus reasonable to include individual factors
in our analysis. These factors include an individuals´ motivation as well as her
modeling expertise. The latter is relevant for this context since extracting
information from models requires the ability to read and understand them.
•
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Study</title>
      <p>Technological factors: Organizations usually have software tools in place in
which models are stored and through which they are accessed. We thus included
technological factors such as the perceived usefulness of a software, its perceived
ease of use and the overall accessibility of process models into our analysis.
In order to study the impact of the aforementioned factors on an individuals´ intention to
repeatedly use a process model, we conducted a cross-sectional survey in one large
representative organization. We selected a particular large European bank since process
models are an important aspect of their work and using process models is a
wellestablished practice there. That organization has a repository containing thousands of
process models. We invited 406 people to participate and received 121 completed and
107 incomplete responses, which we excluded from further analysis.</p>
      <p>For the survey we relied on established measures for each of the aforementioned factors
and included questions that would allow us to gain a deeper understanding about the
organizational context as well as the individual itself. These questions covered age and
gender of a person as well as measures of the time an individual has been a member of
the organization and which organizational unit the person belongs to. We also included
questions about the purpose for which an individual generally uses process models
during her work and we developed a scale aiming at identifying intentions for repeated
use based on the definition described in the previous section (c.f. section 2). Finally, we
included open ended questions which focused on the organizational context as well as on
ideas of people on how to improve process models and process model access. The full
questionnaire can be found in the appendix of our DSS paper [No16].
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Analysis and results</title>
      <p>After data cleansing which included removing inappropriate responses as well as
responses by participants that had not used process models before we ended up at 86
usable data points for our analysis. We conducted a quantitative analysis starting with
descriptive statistics and simple correlations before conducting a structural model
estimation using PLS as well as a supplementary qualitative analysis. Due to page
limitations we will only report on the most significant findings here.</p>
      <p>The structural model analysis revealed the following factors to have a direct and positive
effect on repeated process models use, in descending order of importance:
•
•</p>
      <p>The perceived ease of use of a process model,
the perceived usefulness of a process model,
•
•
the accessibility of a process model and
the motivation of an individual.</p>
      <p>The analysis also revealed that satisfaction has no direct effect on repeated use intentions
despite being influences by the same factors that influence intentions for repeated use.
Furthermore, satisfaction was also influenced by the perceived semantic quality of a
process model.</p>
      <p>These findings were supported by our subsequent qualitative analysis since most
participants stated that models should be “short and simple but with enough details to
understand them”. The qualitative analysis also revealed that models are mainly used
repeatedly to gain or regain knowledge about a process the respective participant is
involved in. We also found enquiries by external stakeholders such as people from other
departments and external partners to be a reason for repeated process model use. We
could however not identify a fit between the original task a model was developed for and
the task it was subsequently repeatedly used for to be a promoting factors for repeated
process model use.</p>
      <p>Finally, we also analyzed suggestions by participants on how to improve the repeated
use of process models. There we found that most participants perceived models to be
useless due to a number of different reasons such as a lack of appreciation for people
who use models and devote time to keeping them up to date. Other reasons for this
perception were the perception of models to be outdated and the perception that only a
subset of existing processes are documented. In order to overcome this perception, some
participants suggested that management support could increase the significance of
process model use. Suggestion into that direction ranged from providing resources to use
process models to expert support for people that are not capable of understanding
process models on their own. Participants also mentioned that process models sometimes
were hard to find in the corporate process model repository and subsequently suggested
to invest in better search functionality.
5</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Conclusion</title>
      <p>Based on the aforementioned analysis we subsequently arrived at the conclusion that
properties of the artifact as well as an individuals´ motivation and the accessibility of
process models are the main factors influencing and individuals´ intention to repeatedly
use a process model. The main influencing factors on individual intentions to repeatedly
use process models however are the perceived ease of interpretation and the perceived
usefulness of a process model. The perceived sematic quality of a process model did not
influence intentions for repeated process model use which leads us to the conclusion that
companies should focus on creating models that are easy to understand rather than
overly complex. In order to foster repeated use, companies should also give their
employees more time to use process models and provide them with means to easily
access and explore them.
[In09]
[No13]
[Ra06]</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [Ko14] [No16] [Th08]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Indulska</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Recker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Rosemann,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Green</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>P.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Business process modeling: Current issues and future challenges</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering. S. 501-514</source>
          ,
          <year>2009</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Koschmider</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fellmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schoknecht</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oberweis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Analysis of process model reuse: Where are we now, where should we go from here?</article-title>
          .
          <source>Decision Support Systems 66, S. 9-19</source>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nolte</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bernhard</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Recker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>You've modelled and now what?”: Exploring determinants of process model re-use</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 24th Australasian Conference for Information Systems</source>
          .
          <year>2013</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nolte</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bernhard</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Recker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pittke</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mendling</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Repeated Use of Process Models: The Impact of Artifact, Technological</article-title>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Individual</given-names>
            <surname>Factors</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>Decision Support Systems 88, S. 98-111</source>
          ,
          <year>2016</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Raduescu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jayaganesh</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bandara</surname>
          </string-name>
          , W.; zur Muehlen, M.;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lippe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A framework of issues in large process modeling projects</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: ECIS. S. 1594-1605</source>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Thom</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ; Reichert,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Chiao</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.M.</given-names>
            ;
            <surname>Iochpe</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Hess</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>G.N.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Inventing less, reusing more, and adding intelligence to business process modeling</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Database and Expert Systems Applications</source>
          . Springer, S.
          <fpage>837</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>850</lpage>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>