<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
# Integrating User Experience and Business Process Management for a Better Human Interaction and Software Design

Mariangela Lazoi, Angela Luperto✉, Aurora Rimini, and Marco Lucio Sarcinella

Department of Innovation Engineering, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Italy
angela.luperto@unisalento.it

**Abstract.** The digital transformation is leading any field of social and working life. New technologies are more and more designed considering the relevant role of the users for providing efficient experience in the application of software solutions. A current research stream is analyzing the potentialities to integrate user experience techniques and business process modelling for reaching better results in software design. In this paper, an application of the integration between user experience and business process management is described for providing more insights in the state of art and suggest future directions also in the design of Product Lifecycle Management systems.

**Keywords:** User experience · Business process management · Human interaction · Software design

## 1 Introduction

Product Lifecycle Management needs new insights and feedback for leading future research and providing software solutions closer to the user needs. In the field of software design, several techniques and methods are used to support the IT architect, software designer and user experience expert to define better and better software solution. Among these, a current research trend integrates the user experience design with the business process management approach. The aim is to provide in the user experience new ways for understanding the users’ needs and workflow of activities and providing a graphical and immediate overview of roles, responsibilities and tasks to be performed that can lead the software design.

The research question of this paper is: *in the current scenario characterized by an intense need of digital technologies in any field, how can the software design be improved for leading a better human interaction?*

The context of study for addressing this research question is the project SAFE (Safe Approach For Event management) that aimed to provide innovative solution for supporting Performing Arts organizations. In the Performing Arts (PA) sector the pandemic deprives spectators of the cultural experience and puts artists and cultural operators in
difficulty, interrupting the demand growth. Forecasts range from the ending of previ-
ous social habits to a slow and gradual return to normality. It is therefore necessary to
seize the opportunities for innovation offered by technology and research to accelerate
the recovery. By exploiting the potential of VR, the paper is based on the design of a
PaaS (Product-as-a-Service) for users to increase accessibility to the cultural event and
support the economic activities of cultural operators. The solution involves the creation
of an application from which the user has the possibility to select an event and purchase
a virtual ticket for the show.

This paper focused on the definition of actors of a VR platform to be developed and
their behaviors and goals in using it. BPM modelling and User Experience tools went
hand in hand with software design, improving the consistency of the overall results. The
outcome of this study consists in a set of BPMN processes for each target actor of the
platform, describing the provisional overall user experience.

The paper is structured as follows. The next section introduces the current state
of art of study merging user experience and Business Process Management (BPM) for
improving the technological human interaction and software design. Section 3 introduces
the main steps of the study and Sect. 4 describes the main results. A final section ends
the paper.

2 Theoretical Background

In order to understand the level of innovativeness of the approach in the solution develop-
ment, the scientific literature have been analyzed on the combined use of User Experience
and BPM to support the design of an IT solution.

## 2.1 Designing New Technologies: User Experience and BPM

New technologies require more complex systems that are difficult to use. A good inter-
action between the user and the system, which is provided by the User Interface (UI),
is needed to manage this complexity. The development of a UI is not easy because it is
difficult and important to understand both the characteristics of the users and the tasks
they perform with the system [1]. This requires User Experience (UX) which is defined
as “a person’s perception and response resulting from the anticipated use and/or use of a
product, system or service” [2]. It is determined whether it is easy or difficult to interact
with the elements of the user interface. UX designers are responsible for determining
how the user interface works, which means that they have to determine the structure, the
functionalities, the usability (i.e., quality attribute that evaluates how easy user interfaces
are to use), the organisation and how all parties interact with each other (see Fig. 1). If
the user interaction is complicated or non-intuitive, the user experience may be very bad
[1].

On the other hand, BPM is defined as a set of concepts, methods, tools and tech-
nologies used to design, implement, analyse and control operational business processes,
including people, systems, functions, businesses, customers, suppliers and partners [3, 4].
Thus, BPM is a process-centric approach to improve performance that combines infor-
mation technologies with governance processes and methodologies. It involves collab-
oration between people and information technologies to promote effective, agile and
transparent business processes [3] and the creation of a platform where processes are managed and monitored [4].

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. User experience interrelations [3].</figcaption></figure>

In this context, Díaz et al. [5, 6] proposed the generation of user interfaces using BPMN (Business Processes Modelling Notation) models in order to cover the gap between what is described in the BPMN models and what it is really implemented in the interface. The first paper [5] proposed a method to generate user interfaces using the BPMN model for extracting information about the navigation between interfaces and their behaviour, and the class diagram for identifying what information is required in each interface. In detail, the proposed method is based on the identification of several rules and uses stereotypes to extend the BPMN. Indeed, these stereotypes are used to generate interfaces based on business process models. However, the approach has some limitations: there is a strong dependency between BPMN and class diagrams and not all BPMN models have a class diagram thus reducing the applicability of the approach. Other limitation is that the approach has not been validated in a real generation of interfaces.

The second paper [6], discussed the problem of the design of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to support the business process. The analyst usually defines the interfaces according to the BPMN models. Since he/she does not design the BPMN models, he/she has to make an effort to define the interfaces according to these models. For this reason, Díaz et al. [6] performed a group of experiments to establish a method that can automatically generate Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) from extended BPMN models with stereotypes. Furthermore, they compared this method to the one in which GUIs were generated manually by considering the experiment's response variables of effort, accuracy and satisfaction (in terms of perceived ease of use (PEOU), perceived usefulness (PU) and intention to use (ITU)). This study has resulted in GUI widgets from more accurate BPMN models but with higher effort in the creation of interfaces, automation of the GUI generation process and less time in understanding the BPMN models.

Traetteberg H. [7] dealt with an approach for modelling business applications using BPMN and Diamodl (i.e., dialog modelling language for user interfaces), where BPMN is used for both process and task modelling and Diamodl for the structure and behaviour of user interfaces (UI). In particular, he focused on how the BPMN can be extended to include tasks and expanded with extra information regarding the object life cycle in order to improve the connection between the approach dealt with, the process and the dialogue modelling.
From this work it emerged that for the design of model-based user interfaces an adaptation of the existing process-oriented notation, that is BPMN, to task modelling makes more sense than introducing other notations that would add further costs.

Pavlickova et al. [8] carried out a usability study combining BPMN notation and the process modelling tool DEMO. They used a collaborative approach based on experience of a series of studies and the interaction of the participants in order to test how easy the BPMN business process modelling tools are to use. To verify this, five usability indicators were used: (1) Learnability - How friendly it is for users to perform tasks they encounter on the design for the first time; (2) Efficiency - Velocity of executing tasks after learning the design; (3) Memorability - How easy it is to re-establish competency after a period of non-use; (4) Errors - Number and severity of errors occurred and how easy it is to resolve errors; (5) Satisfaction - how comfortable it is to use the design. From this study it was identified that the usability testing method can be used to measure, evaluate and design metrics for process model quality and that therefore user experience (UX) approaches are valid for evaluating process model quality (mainly usability) [8].

As Pavlickova et al. [8] also Quiñones et al. [9] used BPMN notation to evaluate aspects different from usability that are related to user experience (UX). In several case studies, they applied a formal methodology through BPMN notation to develop usability/user experience heuristics. The new methodology presents tables summarising the inputs, outputs and activities to be performed on BPMN diagrams, modeling each step. They concluded that if a methodology is not used to develop heuristics, the heuristics created may be (1) difficult to understand, (2) difficult to use, and/or (3) not successful in usability/UX evaluation of a specific application. It emerged that this methodology is applicable to develop heuristics for UX-related aspects such as playability, communica-bility and learnability. It also has great potential in developing tools for further quality attributes such as security and adaptability.

Greunen et al. [3] stated that when user interface design integrates the way users think and learn, accepts their needs, and meets their expectations for comfort and convenience, the human-machine interaction becomes more productive. That is why they focused on factors that influence the UX and the user interface (UI) when using BPM tools to complete tasks in support of business processes. In order to detect these factors and to have a better understanding of the interactions and dependencies between people and technology, a focus group was conducted. It emerged that it is fundamental to have an interface that supports the information needs of organisations in order to meet their critical success factors and achieve organisational goals. Moreover, the identified user experience (UX) factors that have an impact on BPM are divided into 3 categories: (1) People factors: visual design, user needs and interface design; (2) Business factors: tasks supported and business processes; (3) Technology factors: interaction and information design. Finally, the study showed a lack of frameworks and tools to assess and determine UX and a lack of skills in the use of BPM tools [3]. In the following Table 1 the advantages and disadvantages of each technique found in the literature are summarised.
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Summary of the domain of study in the literature.</caption><thead><tr><td>Techniques</td><td>Results</td><td>Disadvantage</td><td>Reference</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Graphical User interface and BPMN model with Class Diagram</td><td>- Information on the interface behaviour<br>- Identity information for each interface<br>- Interface generation on BPMN models</td><td>- Strong dependency of the BPMN and class diagrams<br>- Not validated in a real interface generation</td><td>[5]</td></tr><tr><td>Graphical User Interfaces and BPMN model</td><td>- Generating more accurate GUIs<br>- Automating the GUI generation process<br>- Less time to understand BPMN models</td><td>- The study is based on few experiments<br>- Higher effort for GUI implementation</td><td>[6]</td></tr><tr><td>User Interface design and BPMN with Diamodl</td><td>- Design UI makes sense with BPMN<br>- Low costs for modelling</td><td>- Strong dependency of the BPMN and Diamodl</td><td>[7]</td></tr><tr><td>Usability study and BPMN modelling tools</td><td>- Identify usability of BPMN tools<br>- UX methods valid to assess BPMN quality</td><td>- Determines only usability in the process model</td><td>[8]</td></tr><tr><td>Usability/UX and BPMN</td><td>- Identification of UX-related aspects of usability</td><td>- Determines only some usability aspects</td><td>[9]</td></tr><tr><td>User Experience and BPM tools</td><td>- Identify UX factors that impact on BPM<br>- Better understanding of human-technology interactions</td><td>- Lack of frameworks and tools to assess and determine UX<br>- Lack of skills in BPM tools</td><td>[3]</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 3 Research Method

Based on the analyzed literature, in this paper, user experiences techniques have been combined with Business Process Management to enrich the obtained result. Mock-up is a very wide term that can be used to indicate an explanatory representation of a system. A Mock-Up for a VR reality solution to allow the participation in streaming to a live events has several issues to explore related to the activities to be performed by the events’ organizers and by the spectators, the technological choices to do (e.g. the type of visors) and the final layout that a such solution should have. To obtain this results, the research team has faced several issues and the main research phases are:

1. Defining Processes for the User Experience. BPM modelling and User Experience tools went hand in hand with software design, improving the consistency of the overall results. The outcome of this phase consists in a set of BPMN processes for
each target actor of the platform, describing the provisional overall user experience. In particular, in BPM method, it's usually to attribute al level 0 a high level detail (Mega), at level 1 a more detailed process and so on.

2. **Interviews and Think Aloud with SAFE consultants.** The third phase of the methodology started with the design of a Think Aloud section with each SAFE's consultants. During the section the Blended Experience Timeline was presented and feedback was collected to validate the overall user experience emerging by the previous phase. In this phase, it has been possible to identify a needs assessment on desired functionalities on platform and to the final user needs and type.

3. **User Interfaces Definition.** It aims to design the SAFE VR platform's user interfaces, based on the refined user experience model from the previous phase. User Interface (UI) design is commonly known as the design of the user interface of any IT system that interact with a user through a screen. The BPM notation was adapted to define the views, data and functional elements of the software to be developed, essential elements useful to mockup the related user interfaces.

## 4 Results

The SAFE platform is defined as an IT architecture providing a Virtual Reality live streaming video service as a PaaS (Product-as-a-Service) product that allows cultural operators in the PA sector to provide live cultural events, which can be attended remotely. The Blended Experience Timeline (i.e. Blended Experiences are the embodiment of the interactions between tools, space and practices. Blended Experiences, as illustrated encompass the dynamic and diverse ways in which the people interact with digital tools and spaces to evoke a perception of social facilitation) (see Fig. 2) The purpose of this conceptualization is to describe the Blended Experience provided by SAFE platform for all its kind of users, described as follow under “roles” tag.

Furthermore, the user experience and the user interface of the SAFE VR platform was carried on and formalized with BPMN. Three roles were defined:

* Administrator: He/she is the SAFE Platform orchestrator. Through the use of SAFE Platform he/she can:

- Manage the events' organizers: he/she can visualize and manage the Events' organizers users on platform;

- Manage programming schedules: he/she can visualize and manage the programming schedules created on the platform;

- Manage events: he/she can visualize and manage the events created on the platform by event's organizers;

- Manage booking: he/she can visualize and manage the booking made from Spectator on the platform;

- Manage VR Headset: he/she can manage the reservations for events and can manage the VR headset reservation made by Spectators.
* Event's organizers: he/she focuses on the administrative relationships with stakeholders inside and outside the organization, such as public administration and suppliers. Event's organizer, a user can access to the following functionalities:

- Manage the Organizer profile: Event's manager can manage his profile and can give more information about the organization;

- Manage the Programming schedules: Event's manager can manage the programming schedules about events provided;

- Manage events: Event's manager can create, edit and delete events on his profile;

- Manage a booking: Event's manager can manage all bookings and purchases for virtual participation in an event that are been made on his profile by a spectator.

- Mange a campaign: Event's manager can create, edit and obtain reports about advertising and discount campaigns.

* User "Spectator": he/she is the final user and represent the spectator of live event. The target user can access to the following functionalities:

- Search for an event: Spectators can search on the platform all the events available on SAFE. He/she can make personalized research based on Event's Manager, based on Location and so on.

- Make a reservation: Spectators can make a reservation to watch an event through the SAFE VR Platform (Some screenshots are available here: shared folder). He also can choose if buy or rent a VR Headset to have a more immersive experience;

- Browse an event: Spectator can enjoy the event trough a different mode, such as VR Live Streaming (by using VR device) or Live Streaming (by using a device such as smartphone or smart tv), he can interact with Participants trough game or can interactive functionalities;

- Manage a reservation: A spectator can visualize and manage all his reservation about events.

- Visualize the menu: A spectator can go to the home and visualize all functionalities.

For each role, processes have been modelled and validated. Three groups of processes arise for each role: Administrator's flow, Event's organizer flow and User's flow. Every workflow has been analysed in depth into 3 level.

- **Level 0** shows a bird's-eye view of each actor interacting with the IT platform and has been modeled for Administrator's flow, Event's organizer flow and User's flow.

- **Level 1** For each subprocess defined in the level 0, a second detailed level (Level 1) has been modeled. In this scenario, the aim is to define in a better way the interaction between user and the platform's functionalities trough the task definition.

- **Level 2** At this detail level are modeled the interaction between users and the platform. Thanks to the process model its' possible to have a support for the wireframe design.

As follow an example are provided.

This level 0 (see Fig. 3) is composed by seven subprocesses, and every one of them describe the interaction between user "Administrator" with a platform's functionality.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. Blended experience timeline.</figcaption></figure>

**Event's organizer's flow.** This level 0 is composed by seven subprocesses, and every one of them describe the interaction as the user "Event's organizer" with a platform's functionality. At level 1, the subprocess "Manage the events' organizers" (see Fig. 4), describe the interaction between user and SAFE Platform. At Level 2, is better detailed the activity made by Administrator when "Browse the event's organizers list" (see Fig. 5).
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3. Administrator's flow</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 4. Manage event's organizers</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. Browse the event's organizers list</figcaption></figure>

## 5 Conclusion

The results of the research phases are the method used to design of the SAFE platform's user interfaces based on the refined user experience model from the previous phase. The BPM notation was used to identify the views, data and functional elements of the software to be developed, essential elements useful to mockup the related user interfaces. Thus, each BPMN diagram includes a subset of elements, which coincides with the wireframe of the SAFE platform views. The method used to design the platform is innovative. Indeed, an experiment was conducted to design the functionalities: starting
from a process analysis, a possible interaction process between user and platform has been drowned using BPMN notation, and thanks to the BPMN is possible to understand how to have interaction between VR technology and the platform conceptualized. Processes of the user interface have been designed for the main actors of the platform (administrator, event's organizers and user). Thus, processes have been used as wireframes of the platform mockup. Due to the ease of BPMN and its versatility, it is easy understandable to everyone, and at the same time it is very rigour. However, other notations for process modelling (e.g., EPC) can be considered and applied with limits and strengths of each specific notation. The proposed method has a positive impact on PLM because it contributes to the reduction of product design time, in this case the software. In particular, the codesign activities conducted with the possible end user thanks to BPMN for requirements design not only shorten design time, but also optimise the subsequent development and testing phases, since it is the user preferences modeled in BPMN that guide the development activities. The described result extends the current state of art about the combined use of User Experience and BPM and provide further evidence for future research in this field.

## References

1. Pratama, M., Cahyadi, A.: Effect of user interface and user experience on application sales. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Bandung, Indonesia (2020)

2. Rusu, C., Rusu, V., Roncagliolo, S., González, C.: Usability and user experience: what should we care about? Int. J. Inf. Technol. Syst. **8**, 1–12 (2015)

3. Greunen, D., Merwe, A., Kotzé, P.: Factors Influencing BPM tools: the influence on user experience and user interfaces. Int. J. Comput. ICT Res. **4**(1), 47–57 (2010)

4. Rangiha, M.E., Karakostas, B.: Towards a meta-model for goal-based social BPM. In: Lohmann, N., Song, M., Wohed, P. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNBIP, vol. 171, pp. 104–112. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06257-0_9

5. Diaz, E., Panach, J.I., Rueda, S., Pastor, O.: Towards a Method to Generate GUI Prototypes from BPMN. In: 12th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science, RCIS 2018, Nantes, France (2018)

6. Diaz, E., Panach, J., Rueda, S., Distante, D.: A family of experiments to generate graphical user interfaces from BPMN models with stereotypes. J. Syst. Soft. **173**, 110883 (2021)

7. Trætteberg, H.: UI design without a task modeling language – using bpmn and diamodl for task modeling and dialog design. In: Forbrig, P., Paternò, F. (eds.) HCSE/TAMODIA '2008. LNCS, vol. 5247, pp. 110–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85992-5_9

8. Pavlickova, P., Pavlicek, J.: Business process models (BPMN and DEMO notation) - usability study. In: Pergl, R., Babkin, E., Lock, R., Malyzhenkov, P., Merunka, V. (eds.) EOMAS 2019. LNBIP, vol. 366, pp. 167–174. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35646-0_13

9. Quiñonesa, D., Rusua, C., Rusu, V.: A methodology to develop usability/user experience heuristics. Comput. Stan. Interfaces **59**, 109–129 (2018)