# Domain Model Based Design of Business Process Architectures
## 6 Evaluation
### Individual Evaluation
Due to the sanitary context, their work was conducted in a digital fashion by using a dedicated template of the Miro software. Each of the generated notes had an identifier of the participant from whom it was generated (P1, P2,..., P6), as well as from the researcher that generated it. A total of 156 notes were generated, from which 15% were discarded due to reporting contextual information (cf. [62]). The English version of the resulting affinity diagram is shown in Figure 9.  
Results. According to quantitative results summarized in Table 8, the highest-ranked aspect of the dBPA method was operationality (\(median_{operationality}=5\)) followed by ease of use (\(median_{easeofuse}=4.5\)), efficiency (\(median_{efficiency}=4.0\)), and generality (\(median_{eareality}=3.0\)). Whereas the resulting models of the method were best ranked in terms of completeness (\(median_{completeness}=5.0\)) followed by fidelity (\(median_{fidelity}=4.0\)). Results also showed that the reuse of structured knowledge as an input (DO1) had a favorable impact, which was highest for operationality and completeness (\(median_{DO1,operationality}=median_{DO1,completeness}=5.0\)). The consideration of multiple process relation types (DO2) had a favorable impact, which was highest for efficiency, operationality, and completeness (\(median_{DO2,efficiency}=median_{DO2,operationality}=median_{DO2,completeness}=5.0\)). Finally, the use of an industry-standard language (DO3) had a favorable impact as well, which was highest for completeness (\(median_{DO3,operationality}=5.0\)). For qualitative data analysis, recordings of the interviews were analyzed by creating the affinity diagram in Figure 9, and described in detail in Tables 9 and 10. To illustrate the results, we provide quotes from participants, translated to English. According to this analysis, practitioners agreed that the method was useful to achieve its goal of building a BPA model. The ease of use of the method was positively influenced by its clear procedure, to the point that the potential for automation was discussed. Additionally, a learning curve was identified by the fact that not all interviewees were experts on domain models. However, there was a consensus that having an interdisciplinary team with IT experts would facilitate this issue. Moreover, practitioners identified a salient value of the dBPA method for integrating the work of process experts and IT professionals automating those processes. In terms of efficiency and generality, the dBPA method seems to be more adequate for core processes of mid-size companies with in-house IT capabilities and a  
Figure 9: Affinity diagram: the numbers indicate how many participants referred to the (sub)category. small portion of manual processes. The resulting BPA models generated by using the dBPA method were perceived as complete and correct. The latter was seen as a by-product of the clear procedure where consistency was continuously verified. Regarding the impact of design decisions in the dBPA method and its resulting models, the following was observed. Overall, though the use of domain models as inputs presented some challenges (i.e., learning curve and maintainability), it had the great benefit of making the method more reality-based and objective. The consideration of multiple process relation types was seen as a key factor for the completeness of the resulting BPA models; however, this also might lead to cluttered models, for which the use of alternative/dynamic views might be advisable. Finally, it was perceived that the use of the ArchiMate language was not a problematic issue among participants, who mostly found it easy to understand. Limitations. The individual evaluation of the method needs to be understood within a number of limitations. First, the small sample size can be seen as a threat to external validity. However, we argue that the population of users of the method is quite small as well.