3.0 KiB
3.0 KiB
Quality Criteria: BPMN Business Process Model
Metadata
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| ID | QC-BPMN-001 |
| CrossReference | QC-BC-001, QC-SA-001, QC-UCD-001 |
| DomainLanguages | IT Professional English |
Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-01 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S07 | First public release (1.0.0) | — |
Purpose
BPMN process models describe how business goals are actually carried out across participants, so their quality directly determines whether downstream use cases and requirements are grounded in a correct, unambiguous understanding of the process.
Quality Criteria Checklist
Level: Mandatory criteria are the baseline every instance must meet; Optional criteria are advanced and may be deferred.
| # | Criterion | Level | ISO/IEC 25010 Characteristic(s) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Diagram uses valid BPMN 2.0 syntax (events, gateways, activities, sequence/message flows) | Mandatory | Functional Suitability, Compatibility | Verify element types and notation conform to the BPMN 2.0 specification. |
| 2 | Swimlanes/pools are clearly defined for each participant | Mandatory | Usability, Functional Suitability | Every actor/role involved in the process has its own lane or pool. |
| 3 | No dead-end flows; every path reaches a defined end event | Mandatory | Functional Suitability, Reliability | Trace each branch from start to end event. |
| 4 | Gateway split/join logic is consistent (matching AND/XOR pairs) | Mandatory | Functional Suitability, Reliability | A gateway that splits a flow must be closed by a matching gateway type. |
| 5 | Process maps to a stated business goal from the Business Case | Mandatory | Functional Suitability | Cross-check against Business Case objectives/scope. |
| 6 | Message flows correctly cross pool boundaries and internal sequence flows do not | Mandatory | Functional Suitability, Compatibility | Common notation error to check explicitly. |
| 7 | Diagram is readable without excessive flow crossings or ambiguous labeling | Optional | Usability, Maintainability | Supports faster, less error-prone reviews and maintenance. |
Common Defects
- Sequence flows drawn across pool boundaries instead of message flows
- Unlabeled or ambiguously labeled gateways, making split logic unclear
- Missing end events, leaving process paths open-ended
- Activities assigned to no lane, or to the wrong participant
- Process diagram with no traceable link to a Business Case objective
Traceability Rule
- Backward: Must link to the Business Case checklist (QC-BC-001) for objectives/scope and the Stakeholder Analysis checklist (QC-SA-001) for relevant needs that justify the process.
- Forward: Feeds into the Use Case Diagram checklist (QC-UCD-001) that formalizes system-supported steps of the process.