14 Two examples of the used evaluation criteria by Geambasu (2012) were: capacity of being readily understandable and the adequacy of the graphical elements of BPMN and UML AD to represent the real business processes of an organization. Both are considered essential for this specific problem. The choice for BPMN is supported by Balsters (2015), who states that BPMN is widely accepted and the standard notation. This aspect of BPMN is supported by the following statement of Recker (2010): “BPMN has become the de facto standard for process modelling.” Balsters (2015) also argues that using BPMN eases the communication between modeller and business people and helps to bridge the gap between business and IT. This statement of the usability of the BPMN technique from Balsters is underlined by the research of Weber et al. (2008). Despite the fact that there is a discussion in literature about the dominant method to design business models, the overall study to create an acceptable appraisal system uses BPMN models. Therefore this validation research is based on this specific modelling technique, merely since a validation will be performed of the already created BPMN model by Kamps (2015). To organize activities a set of elements and connectors is used in BPMN. These figures are depicted in so named swimlanes, used as mechanism to organize activities into separate visual categories to illustrate different functional capabilities or responsibilities (White, 2004). The main elements are mentioned in table 2.1.
Objects
Represented by Description
Event
Circle
Represent triggers and is something that “happens”.
Events can be the start, intermediate, and end.
Activity
Rounded-corner
rectangle
Tasks and sub-process, represents work that is
performed.
Gateway
Diamond shape Control the divergence and convergence of sequence
flow. So it will, among other things, determine
decisions.
Sequence flow Solid line
Shows the order between activities performed in a
process.
Message flow
Dashed line
Shows the flow of messages between two separate
process participants.
Table 2.1. Main elements of BPMN
24 the study have already been discussed in the theory part. Based on the match between the characteristics per method and the CSF’s and advantages (see Appendix C), the different pricing methods have been ordered. The most favourite method is the hedonic method for regular properties and the hybrid method for extraordinary houses. The least favourite selected method is the price comparison method. Al three methods have been made suitable for the specific context by Kamps. For example, experts suggested to replace the base price of a property used in the hedonic method by a price determination of real estate using the NVM (Dutch association of realtors) characteristics. Secondly the stakeholders were selected based on their expected ability perceived by affected inhabitants to represent them. Based on interviews, three parties were selected. Namely; The WAG, legal expense insurance and the affected inhabitants themselves. The third difficulty addressed in this step is the choice of data providers. There have been different databases selected during the interviews to determine the depreciation of properties. The most suited and complete database is the NVM database. For missing information, the databases of Monumentenzorg (in English: historic preservation) and the municipalities can be used.
4.3 Design Solution
The design solution of Kamps (2015) is a BPMN model consisting of several levels and processes. The model exactly describes all the sequential steps from the need of appraisal by the affected inhabitant up to possible compensation. Some activities are separate processes based on several sub activities. Every process is included in the appendix. The titles of the six different processes are given in table 4.1 below.Level
Title of the process
Appendix
29 The activities which got some remarks from the stakeholders during the validation interviews are summarized in the tables 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4, sorted per level. Moreover, missed activities are introduced. Below the three tables an additional explanation can be found. Quotes of interviewees are numbered and can be found in Appendix F. Level 1
Activity
Complete
swimlane of the
legal expense
insurance.
31
Level 2
Figure 4.3. Level 1: The alternative appraisal model
35
46
Appendix C
List of pros and cons calculation methods Kamps (2015).
Price comparison method Hedonic method Hybrid method
49
