Flexibility vs. structure: Choosing the right process modeling

Let's first address the question: How do I find the right approach for my company or process? The choice of the optimal process modeling approach depends on a variety of factors, including the complexity of business processes, the needs of employees, the industry in which the company operates, and the specific goals that the modeling is intended to achieve. To find the right approach, it is important to conduct a thorough analysis of current workflows and requirements, understand the various modeling methods, and carefully weigh their pros and cons.

Let's first take a look at the most common methods of process modeling and their respective advantages and disadvantages. From traditional approaches such as prose texts to standards such as BPMN 2.0 to techniques such as turtle representations, the world of process modeling offers a wide range of options. However, each approach presents its own challenges but also opportunities that need to be understood and weighed up.

The most important question about choosing modeling: What is the goal of modeling?

The overall goal of any process modeling is to present the processes and structures of a company or organization clearly, comprehensibly and efficiently. By modelling processes, complex work processes are translated into easy-to-understand representations, interfaces are precisely defined and a reliable basis for process execution is created. They also enable the analysis and optimization of processes and communication in the event of changes within processes. This includes, for example, system software changes, ERP changes, organizational restructuring and the introduction of new products.

Ultimately, process modelling should contribute to defining and implementing clear rules of the game and thus increasing efficiency or even avoiding errors. Depending on the context and use case, the goals of process modeling may vary. A decisive aspect is whether the modelling human- or technology-centered is.

Human-centred modelling focuses on people. The aim here is to provide employees with assistance in everyday life, to facilitate and structure work processes, and to ensure the quality of work. This form of modelling is particularly used in the area of quality management, where the aim is to provide employees with clear instructions and guidelines to increase productivity and reduce errors.

Technology-centered modeling, on the other hand, focuses on machines and technical systems, particularly when workflows are to be digitized. The aim here is to model technical processes in such a way that they can be carried out efficiently by machines. This is particularly important in Industry 4.0, where the focus is on automating and digitizing production processes. Through precise modelling, machines and systems can be optimally configured and controlled to ensure maximum efficiency and minimal downtime.

Many companies have “different warehouses” and views on process management. As a conclusion, you can remember:

• Human-centered process representations = advantages in understanding “cooking recipes” for employees + visualizations with BPMN 2.0 light for a quick overview on the high flight level.

• Technology-centered process representations = major benefits of BPMN 2.0 for workflow engines

To get back to the question: Is there an ideal model? No!

In process modeling, there is no one universal method that perfectly covers all requirements and needs of a company. Rather, the strength lies in combining different approaches to best meet specific requirements.

However, it is important to differentiate between BPMN 2.0 and BPMN 2.0 Light. BPMN 2.0 offers extensive options for modeling very complex processes and interfaces. This complexity overwhelms most users. This is where BPMN 2.0 Light comes in. This simplified visualization is used to increase comprehensibility and thus lower the hurdle for less tech-savvy users to use BPMN.

BPMN 2.0 light can therefore be used to represent the numerous and complex interfaces in a process. It offers a uniform and understandable visualization method that enables efficient integration in both human and machine contexts. This is particularly helpful when presenting complex processes with many interactions and interfaces. Thanks to the clear structure and standardized notation of BPMN 2.0 light, companies can better understand, analyze and optimize processes, which ultimately leads to greater efficiency through transparency.

Well-chosen graphics provide a good overview of the structure, while tabular representations are convincing due to their simplicity and link process management directly with knowledge management.

In practice, the QM document pyramid for a management system can be translated as follows:

• For the Process map It is obvious that a graphical representation is the best choice. However, when looking at the other levels, the question often arises as to which form of presentation is the right one here.

• Process overviews are also usually presented graphically, as they should provide a clear overview.

• Process descriptions and sub-processes should ideally be designed like a cooking recipe to support implementation. The interfaces are already visible at the higher-level graphical level. The interfaces in the cooking recipes are also shown with the process table.

• Sub-processes can be represented almost exclusively in the form of cooking recipes.

• work instructions should be designed as detailed cooking recipes with pictures or even videos to optimally support the implementation.

Everyone must find the right path individually by keeping an eye on their goals and asking themselves again and again: Who am I modeling for — for people or for machines?

‍