![](bg6.png)
According to the analysis, and taking into
account specific criteria requirements tool, the tool
ARIS Full (complete and paid) received the highest
average score. Considering only the criteria for
additional support, tools QPR, BizAgi Free, and
BizAgi Express were tied in the lead. In the final
average, the tool ARIS Full received the highest
score.
By observing the average of fulfilling the criteria
for the tools it is possible understand what criteria
the manufacturers are more concerned with
delivering. The three criteria are best placed: 1 -
additional attributes for objects in the model, 2 -
WEB publication of the model in 3 - validation
mechanisms for the model.
Another observation is that the average final
score of the paid tools is not so far off compared to
the average final score of the free tools. This result
may indicate a strengthening of the free versions.
There are other factors that may be considered on
tools. For example, the tool QPR was only a tenth
behind the complete ARIS, which may recommend
its use. Still, cost issues may recommend using a
free tool such as BizAgi free, which scored even
higher than some paid tools.
Figure 4: Average final comparative tools.
5 CONCLUSIONS
After the performance modeling and analysis by a
group of experts, followed for an analysis by regular
users, the research points to the BPMN notation as a
solution more understandable by humans and has
potential to be translated into machines. In addition,
regarding tools, the results indicated the complete
ARIS, the QPR Express and BizAgi, the latter free.
An important contribution of this work was to
consider notations and tools whose relationship has
yet been little explored in previous works. Still, we
considered only specific tools of process modeling.
Another contribution was the structuring of criteria
from previous work, and even the addition of
specific criteria to the objectives covered by the
study. Finally, the recommendation of a method and
a specific tool, and provides more concrete basis for
the advancement of research in this area.
REFERENCES
Abdala, M., Lahoz, C., & Sant'Anna, N. (2003).
Utilizando o SPEM para a modelagem dos processos
da qualidade e do gerenciamento da configuração em
um ambiente integrado. V Simpósio Internacial de
Melhora de Processo de Software .
Agular-Savén, R. S. (2003). Business process modelling:
review and framework. International Journal of
Production Economics .
Alexandre, J. W. (2003). Análise do número de categorias
da escala Likert aplicada a gestão pela qualidade total
através da teoria da resposta ao item. Encontro
Nacional de Engehnaria de PRodução .
Araujo, R., Cappelli, C., Gomes Jr, A., Pereira, M.,
Iendrike, H. d., Ielpo, D., et al. (2004). A definição de
processos de software sob o ponto de vista da gestão
de processos de negócio. IV Simpósio Internacional de
Melhoria de Processos de Software .
Bargis, J. (2008). The importance of business process
modeling in software system design. Sicence of
Computer Programming .
Benedictis, C., Amaral, D. C., & Rozendfeld, H. (2003).
Avaliação dos principais métodos e ferramentas
disponíveis para a modelagem do processo de
desenvolvimento de produto. IV Congresso Brasileiro
de Gestão de Desenvolvimento de Produtos .
Gartner Group. (2008). Magic Quadrant for Business
Process Analysis Tools.
Gonzales-Perez, C., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2007).
Modelling software development methodologies: a
conceptual foundation. The journal of Systems and
Software .
Green, P., & Rosemann, M. (2000). Integrated process
modeling: an ontological evaluation. Information
Systems , 25 (2).
IEEE. (1998). Standard for Functional Modeling
Language Syntax and Semantics for IDEF0 . IEEE
Explore .
Macedo, R. d., & Schmitz, E. A. (2001). Ferramentas de
modelagem de processo: uma avaliação. XXXIII
Simpósio Brasileiro de Pesquisa Operacional (SBPO).
Norton, D., Blechar, M., & Jones, T. (2010). Magic
quadrant for business process analysis tools. Gartner
RAS Core Research.
OMG. (2010). Business Process Model and Notation
(BPMN).
Ortiz-Hernández, J., Nieto-Ariza, M. E., Estrada-Esquivel,
H., Rodrígues-Ortiz, G., & Montes-Rendon, A.
(2007). SOQUA'07. Dubrovnik, Coratia.
Recker, C. J. (2010). Opportuniites and constraints: the
current struggle witdh BPMN. Business Process
Management Journal , pp. 181-201.
Santos Jr, P. S., Almeida, J. P., & Guizzardi, G. (2010).
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
342