Distributed and Parallel Databases

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 119–153

An overview of workflow management: From process modeling to workflow automation infrastructure

  • Diimitrios Georgakopoulos
  • Mark Hornick
  • Amit Sheth
Article

Abstract

Today's business enterprises must deal with global competition, reduce the cost of doing business, and rapidly develop new services and products. To address these requirements enterprises must constantly reconsider and optimize the way they do business and change their information systems and applications to support evolving business processes. Workflow technology facilitates these by providing methodologies and software to support (i) business process modeling to capture business processes as workflow specifications, (ii) business process reengineering to optimize specified processes, and (iii) workflow automation to generate workflow implementations from workflow specifications. This paper provides a high-level overview of the current workflow management methodologies and software products. In addition, we discuss the infrastructure technologies that can address the limitations of current commercial workflow technology and extend the scope and mission of workflow management systems to support increased workflow automation in complex real-world environments involving heterogeneous, autonomous, and distributed information systems. In particular, we discuss how distributed object management and customized transaction management can support further advances in the commercial state of the art in this area.

Keywords

Business Process Re-engineering Workflow Systems Customized Transaction Management 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Alsop, “Workflow Automation Integration Requires A Large Technology Toolkit and A Structured Approach,” Computer Technology Review, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Ansari, L. Ness, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Sheth, “Using Flexible Transactions to Support Multisystem Telecommunication Applications,” Proceedings of the 18th Intl. Conf. on VLDB, August 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Action Workflow System product literature. Action Technologies Inc., 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Black, “Workflow Software: A Layman's Handbook, Part I,” INFORM, April 1994.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Billiris, D. Gehani, H. Jagadish, and K. Ramamritham, “ASSET: A System for Supporting Extended Transactions,” Proceedings of SIGMOD, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Bever, K. Geihs, L. Heuser, M. Muhlhauser, and A. Schill, “Distributed Systems, OSF DCE, and Beyond,”Proceedings of the DCE—The OSF Distributed Computing Environment, International DCE Workshop, Karlsruhe, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. Breitbart, A. Deacon, H.-J. Schek, A. Sheth, and G. Weikum, “Merging Application-centric and Data-centric Approaches to Support Transaction-oriented Multi-system Workflows,” in SIGMOD Record, 22(3), September 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. Breitbart, D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Silberschatz, “On Rigorous Transaction Scheduling,”IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 17(9), September 1991.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P.A. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman.Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Chrysanthis and K. Ramamritham, “A Formalism for Extended Transaction Models,”Proceedings of the 17th VLDB Conference, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W. Eckerson, “Case Study: The Role of IS in Reengineering,” Open Information Systems, Patricia Seybold Group, Vol. 9, No. 2, February 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Elmagarmid, Y. Leu, W. Litwin, and M. Rusinkiewicz, “A Multidatabase Transaction Model for InterBase,”Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on VLDB, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, A. Elmagarmid (ed.), Morgan-Kaufmann, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Frye, “Move to Workflow Provokes Business Process Scrutiny,” Software Magazine, April 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Georgakopoulos, et al., “An Extended Transaction Environment for Workflows in Distributed Object Computing,” in [20].Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Georgakopoulos, and M. Hornick, “A Framework for Enforceable Specification of Extended Transaction Models and Transactional Workflows,” International Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, World Scientific, September 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. Georgakopoulos, M. Hornick, Piotr Krychniak, and F. Manola, “Specification and Management of Extended Transactions in a Programmable Transaction Environment,” Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Data Engineering, Houston, TX, February 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and W. Litwin, “Chronological Scheduling of Transactions with Temporal Dependencies,”VLDB Journal, January 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Sheth, “Using Ticket-based Methods to Enforce the Serializability of Multidatabase Transactions,”IEEE Trans. on Data and Knowledge Engineering, February, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    “Special Issue on Workflow and Extended Transaction Systems,” M. Hsu (ed.),Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering (IEEE Computer Society), 16(2), June 1993.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Hsu and C. Kleissner, “ObjectFlow: Towards a Process Management Infrastructure,” submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    I. Jacobson,Object-Oriented Software Engineering—A Use Case Driven Approach, ACM Press, Addison-Wesley, 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    P. Korzeniowski, “Workflow Software Automates Processes,” Software Magazine, February 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    N. Krishnakumar and A. Sheth, “Managing Heterogeneous Multi-system Tasks to Support Enterprise-wide Operations,” in this issue.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    F. Leymann and D. Roller, “Business Process Management with FlowMark,”Proceedings of IEEE Compcon, March 1994.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    B. Liskov, “Distributed Programming in Argus,”Communications of ACM, 31(3), March 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. McCready, “There is more than one kind of Work-flow Software,” Computerworld, November 2 1992.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    F. Manola, “MetaObject Protocol Concepts for a “RISC” Object Model,” GTE Laboratories Incorporated, TR-0244-12-93-165, Dec. 1993.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    R. Marshak, “Software to Support BPR—The value of Capturing Process Definitions,” Workgroup Computing Report, Patricia Seybold Group, Vol. 17, No. 7, July 1994.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    F. Manola, S. Heiler, D. Georgakopoulos, M. Hornick, and M. Brodie, “Distributed Object Management,”International Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, 1(1), March 1992.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    D. McCarthy and S. Sarin, “Workflow and Transactions in InConcert,” Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Vol. 16, No. 2, June 1993.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    R. Medina-Mora, T. Winograd, and R. Flores, “Action Workflow as the Enterprise Integration Technology,” Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Vol. 16, No. 2, June 1993.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    R. Medina-Mora, H. Wong, and P. Flores, “The Action Workflow Approach to Workflow Management,” Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, June 1992.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    “Building Networks: New York Telephone rethinks work to regain lost customers,” Scientific American, November 1992.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    “The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification,” Pub. Object Management Group and X/Open, OMG Document Number 91.12.1, Rev. 1.1, 1991.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    “Object Management Architecture Guide,” OMG TC Document 92.11.1, 1992.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    “Object Transaction Service,” OMG TC Document 94.8.4.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, W. Lorensen,Object-Oriented Modeling and Design, Prentice Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    M. Rusinkiewicz and A. Sheth, “Specification and Execution of Transactional Workflows,” In Modern Database Systems: The Object Model, Interoperability, and Beyond, W. Kim, Ed., ACM Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    T. Smith, “The Future of Work flow Software,” INFORM, April 1993.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    T. Schael and B. Zeller, “Design Principles for Cooperative Office Support Systems in Distributed Process Management,” inSupport Functionality in the Office Environment, A. Verrijn-Stuart (ed), North Holland, 1991.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    T. Winograd and R. Flores,Understanding Computers and Cognition, Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    H. Watcher and A. Reuter, “The ConTract Model,” Chapter 7, In [13], 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diimitrios Georgakopoulos
    • 1
  • Mark Hornick
    • 1
  • Amit Sheth
    • 2
  1. 1.GTE Laboratories IncorporatedWaltham
  2. 2.LSDIS Lab, Department of C.S.University of GeorgiaAthens

Personalised recommendations