Electronic Commerce Research

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 269–316 | Cite as

Business process management with the user requirements notation

  • Alireza Pourshahid
  • Daniel Amyot
  • Liam Peyton
  • Sepideh Ghanavati
  • Pengfei Chen
  • Michael Weiss
  • Alan J. Forster


A number of recent initiatives in both academia and industry have sought to achieve improvements in e-businesses through the utilization of Business Process Management (BPM) methodologies and tools. However there are still some inadequacies that need to be addressed when it comes to achieving alignment between business goals and business processes. The User Requirements Notation (URN), recently standardized by ITU-T, has some unique features and capabilities beyond what is available in other notations that can help address alignment issues. In this paper, a URN-based framework and its supporting toolset are introduced which provide business process monitoring and performance management capabilities integrated across the BPM lifecycle. The framework extends the URN notation with Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and other concepts to measure and align processes and goals. An example process for controlling access to a healthcare data warehouse is used to illustrate and evaluate the framework. Early results indicate the feasibility of the approach.


Business process management Business process model Goal-oriented business process monitoring Performance management User requirement notation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Amyot, D. (2003). Introduction to the user requirements notation: Learning by example. Computer Networks, 42(3), 285–301. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amyot, D., Becha, H., Bræk, R., & Rossebø, J. E. Y. (2008). Next generation service engineering. In ITU-T innovations in NGN kaleidoscope conference (pp. 195–202), Geneva, Switzerland, May 2008. IEEE CS. Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Appian (2007).
  4. 4.
    Bruce Silver Associates (2006). The 2006 BPMS report: Understanding and evaluating BPM suite. Published in collaboration with 2006. Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, P. (2007). Goal-oriented business process monitoring: An approach based on user requirement notation combined with business intelligence and Web services. M.Sc. thesis, Carleton University, Canada, December 2007.
  6. 6.
    Chowdhary, P. et al. (2006). Model driven development for business performance management. IBM Systems Journal, 45(3), 587–605. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B. A., Yu, E., & Mylopoulos, J. (2000). Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cognos, an IBM Company (2006). Cognos 8 business intelligence.
  9. 9.
    Debevoise, T. (2005). Business process management with a business rules approach. Business Knowledge Architects, 2005. Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    De la Vara González, J.L. & Sánchez Díaz, J. (2007). Business process-driven requirements engineering: a goal-based approach. In 8th workshop on business process modeling, development, and support (BPMDS’07), Trondheim, Norway, June 2007. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    DiToro, L., & Schaffhauser, D. (2006). BPM software report: Tibco iProcess suite 10.5., CTQ Media LLC. Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dresner, H. (2003). Business activity monitoring. In Gartner symposium, Cannes, France, 4–7 November 2003. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Enix Consulting (2006). Issues and best practices for the BPM and SOA journey (White paper). Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferdian, A. (2001). Comparison of event-driven process chains and UML activity diagram for denoting business processes. Masters thesis, Technische Universität Hamburg-Harburg, Germany, April 2001. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghanavati, S. (2007). A compliance framework for business processes based on URN. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada, May 2007.
  16. 16.
    Ghose, A. K., Koliadis, G., Vranesevic, A., Bhuiyan, M., & Krishna, A. (2006). Combining i* and BPMN for business process model lifecycle management. In LNCS : Vol. 4103. Proc. BPM-2006 workshop on grid and peer-to-peer based workflows (pp. 416–427). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Global 360 (2007).
  18. 18.
    Gong, L. et al. (2005). Deliver an effective and flexible data warehouse solution, Part 2: Develop a warehouse data model. IBM, Jul. 2005. Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greenwood, D., & Rimassa, G. (2007). Autonomic goal-oriented business process management. In Third international conference on autonomic and autonomous systems (ICAS’07), Athens, Greece. IEEE CS. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grigori, D. et al. (2004). Business process intelligence. Computers in Industry, 53(3). Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heß, H. (2006). From corporate strategy to process performance—what comes after business intelligence? In Corporate performance management (pp. 7–29). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Inmon, W. H. (2005). Building the data warehouse. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Intalio (2007).
  25. 25.
    ITU-T (2008). Recommendation Z. 151 (11/08): User requirements notation (URN)—language definition. Geneva, Switzerland. Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jeston, J., & Nelis, J. (2006). Why six sigma is not complete without BPM. In Business process management: Practical guidelines to successful implementations. London: Butterworth-Heinemann. Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kealey, J. (2007). Enhanced use case map analysis and transformation tooling. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada, October 2007.
  28. 28.
    Keen, M. et al. (2006). Patterns: SOA foundation—business process management scenario. IBM Redbooks. Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kimball, R., & Ross, M. (2002). The data warehouse toolkit: The complete guide to dimensional modeling. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krogstie, J. (2005). EEML2005: Extended enterprise modeling language (Technical report). Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway. Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kronz, A. (2006). Managing of process key performance indicators as part of the ARIS methodology. In Corporate performance management (pp. 31–44). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Küng, P., Hagen, C., Rodel, M., & Seifert, S. (2005). Business process monitoring & measurement in a large bank: Challenges and selected approaches. In Proc. 16th int. workshop on database and expert systems applications (DEXA’05) (pp. 955–961), August 2005. Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lapouchnian, A., Yu, Y., & Mylopoulos, J. (2007). Requirements-driven design and configuration management of business processes. In LNCS : Vol. 4714. Business process management (pp. 246–261). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Levene, M., & Loizou, G. (2003). Why is the snowflake schema a good data warehouse design? Information Systems, 28(3), 225–240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    List, B., & Korherr, B. (2005). A UML 2 profile for business process modeling. In LNCS : Vol. 3770. 1st int. workshop on best practices of UML. Klagenfurt, Austria (pp. 85–96). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    List, B., & Korherr, B. (2006). An evaluation of conceptual business process modelling languages. In 21st ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC’06) (pp. 1532–1539), Dijon, France. Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Liu, L., & Yu, E. (2004). Designing information systems in social context: A goal and scenario modelling approach. Information Systems, 29(2), 187–203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lombardi Software (2007).
  39. 39.
    Longo, A., & Motta, G. (2006). Design processes for sustainable performances: A model and a method. In LNCS : Vol. 3812. BPM 2005 workshops (pp. 399–407). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Marketos, G., & Theodoridis, Y. (2006). Measuring performance in the retail industry. In LNCS : Vol. 4103. BPM 2006 workshops (pp. 129–140). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mayer, R., Menzel, C., Painter, M., Witte, P., Blinn, T., & Perakath, B. (2005). Information integration for concurrent engineering—IDEF3 process description capture method report. Texas: Knowledge Based Systems Inc. Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mili, H., Jaodue, G. B., Lefebvre, E., Tremlay, G., & Petrenko, A. (2003). Business process modeling languages: Sorting through the alphabet soup (TR LATECE). UQAM, 55 pages, November 2003. Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mussbacher, G. (2007). Evolving use case maps as a scenario and workflow description language. In 10th workshop of requirement engineering (WER’07) (pp. 56–67), Toronto, Canada, May 2007. Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mussbacher, G., & Amyot, D. (2008). Assessing the applicability of use case maps for business process and workflow description. In 2008 international MCETECH conference on e-technologies (pp. 219–222), Montréal, Canada, January 2008. IEEE CS. Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mussbacher, G., Amyot, D., & Weiss, M. (2007). Visualizing early aspects with use case maps. In Transactions on aspect-oriented software development III (pp. 105–143). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nicholls, C. (2006). In search of insight. See Why Software Limited. August 2006. Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    OMG (2008). Business process modeling notation (BPMN), version 1.1, January 2008.
  48. 48.
    OMG (2008). Business motivation model (BMM), version 1.0, January 2008.
  49. 49.
    OMG (2008). Business process modeling notation (BPMN) information., accessed December 7, 2008.
  50. 50.
    PHIPA (2004). Personal health information protection act. Government of Ontario, Canada, 2004.
  51. 51.
    Pourshahid, A. (2008). A URN-based methodology for business process monitoring. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada, March 2008.
  52. 52.
    Pourshahid, A., Chen, P., Amyot, D., Weiss, M., & Forster, A. J. (2007). Business process monitoring and alignment: An approach based on the user requirements notation and business intelligence tools. In 10th workshop of requirement engineering (WER’07) (pp. 80–91), Toronto, Canada, May 2007. Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Reijers, H. A. (2005). Process-aware information systems. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Roy, J.-F., Kealey, J., & Amyot, D. (2006). Towards integrated tool support for the user requirements notation. In LNCS : Vol. 4320. SAM 2006: Fifth workshop on system analysis and modelling (pp. 198–215). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Roy, J.-F. (2007). Requirement engineering with URN: Integrating goals and scenarios. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada, March 2007.
  56. 56.
    Rudden, J. (2007). Making the case for BPM—a benefits checklist. In BPTrends, January 2007. Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    van der Aalst, W. M. P., & ter. Hofstede, A. H. M. (2005). YAWL: Yet another workflow language. Information Systems, 30(4), 245–275. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Vonderheide-Liem, D. N., & Pate, B. (2004). Applying quality methodologies to improve healthcare: Six sigma, lean thinking, balanced scorecard, and more. HCPro, Inc., November 2004. Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wahli, U., Avula, W., Macleod, H., Saeed, M., & Vinther, A. (2007). Business process management: Modeling through monitoring using WebSphere V6.0.2 products. IBM Redbooks. Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Weiss, M., & Amyot, D. (2005). Designing and evolving business models with URN. In Montreal Conf. on eTechnologies (MCeTech) (pp. 149–162). Montreal, Canada, Jan. 2005. Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Weiss, M., & Amyot, D. (2006). Business process modeling with URN. International Journal of E-Business Research, 1(3), 63–90. Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    White, S. A. (2004). Introduction to BPMN. May 2004. Available online at
  63. 63.
    Williams, B. (2007). BPM: The next stage for continuous process improvement. Software AG, webMethods. Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Yu, E. (1997). Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In 3rd IEEE int. symp. on requirements engineering (pp. 226–235), Washington, USA. IEEE CS. Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Zhan, B. (2007). An integrated quality assurance framework for enterprise performance management systems. M.Sc. thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alireza Pourshahid
    • 1
  • Daniel Amyot
    • 1
  • Liam Peyton
    • 1
  • Sepideh Ghanavati
    • 1
  • Pengfei Chen
    • 2
  • Michael Weiss
    • 2
  • Alan J. Forster
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Information Technology and Engineering (SITE)University of OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Department of Systems and Computer EngineeringCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Department of MedicineUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  4. 4.Ottawa Health Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology ProgramOttawa HospitalOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations