Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 359–405 | Cite as

Business process compliance checking – applying and evaluating a generic pattern matching approach for conceptual models in the financial sector

  • Jörg Becker
  • Patrick Delfmann
  • Hanns-Alexander Dietrich
  • Matthias Steinhorst
  • Mathias Eggert
Article

Abstract

Given the strong increase in regulatory requirements for business processes the management of business process compliance becomes a more and more regarded field in IS research. Several methods have been developed to support compliance checking of conceptual models. However, their focus on distinct modeling languages and mostly linear (i.e., predecessor-successor related) compliance rules may hinder widespread adoption and application in practice. Furthermore, hardly any of them has been evaluated in a real-world setting. We address this issue by applying a generic pattern matching approach for conceptual models to business process compliance checking in the financial sector. It consists of a model query language, a search algorithm and a corresponding modelling tool prototype. It is (1) applicable for all graph-based conceptual modeling languages and (2) for different kinds of compliance rules. Furthermore, based on an applicability check, we (3) evaluate the approach in a financial industry project setting against its relevance for decision support of audit and compliance management tasks.

Keywords

Conceptual modeling Business process modeling Business process compliance management Model checking Model querying Pattern matching Compliance checking 

References

  1. Abdullah, N. S., Indulska, M., & Shazia, S. (2009). A study of compliance management in information systems research. In Proc. of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS).Google Scholar
  2. Abdullah, N. S., Sadiq, S., & Indulska, M. (2010). Emerging Challenges in Information Systems Research for Regulatory Compliance Management. In B. Pernici (Ed.), Advanced Information Systems Engineering (Vol. 6051, pp. 251–265). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13094-6_21
  3. Accorsi, R., Lowis, L., & Sato, Y. (2011). Automated certification for compliant cloud-based business processes. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 3(3), 145–154. doi:10.1007/s12599-011-0155-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arbab, F., Kokash, N., & Meng, S. (2009). Towards Using Reo for Compliance-Aware Business Process Modeling. In T. Margaria & B. Steffen (Eds.), Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation (Vol. 17, pp. 108–123). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88479-8_9
  5. Awad, A. (2007). BPMN-Q: A Language to Query Business Processes (Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures Concepts and Applications Proceedings of the 2nd Int’l Workshop EMISA 2007 (Vol. 119, pp. 115–128)). Germany: St. Goar.Google Scholar
  6. Awad, A., Decker, G., & Weske, M. (2008). Efficient Compliance Checking Using BPMN-Q and Temporal Logic. In M. Dumas, M. Reichert, & M.-C. Shan (Eds.), Business Process Management (Vol. 5240, pp. 326–341). Milan: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Awad, A., & Sakr, S. (2010). Querying Graph-Based Repositories of Business Process Models. In M. Yoshikawa, X. Meng, T. Yumoto, Q. Ma, L. Sun, & C. Watanabe (Eds.), Database Systems for Advanced Applications (Vol. 6193, pp. 33–44). Tsukuba: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Awad, A., Smirnov, S., & Weske, M. (2009). Towards Resolving Compliance Violations in Business Process Models (In S. Sadiq, M. Indulska, M. zur Muehlen, E. Dubois, & P. Johannesson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRCIS’09)). Amsterdam: The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  9. Awad, A., & Weske, M. (2009). Visualization of compliance violation in business process models. In S. Rinderle-Ma, S. Sadiq, & F. Leymann (Eds.), Business Process Management Workshops (Vol. 43, pp. 182–193). Ulm: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-12186-9_17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker, J., Bergener, P., Delfmann, P., & Weiß, B. (2011). Modeling and Checking Business Process Compliance Rules in the Financial Sector. In D. F. Galletta & T.-P. Liang (Eds.), Proc. of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS).Google Scholar
  11. Becker, J., Breuker, D., Weiß, B., & Winkelmann, A. (2010). Exploring the Status Quo of Business Process Modelling Languages in the Banking Sector – An Empirical Insight into The Usage of Methods in Banks (In Proc. of the Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS)). Australia: Brisbane.Google Scholar
  12. Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Eggert, M., & Schwittay, S. (2012a). Generalizability and applicability of model-based business process compliance-checking approaches – A state-of-the-art analysis and research roadmap. Business Research, 5(2), 221–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Herwig, S., & Lis, L. (2009). A Generic Set Theory-based Pattern Matching Approach for the Analysis of Conceptual Models. In A. H. F. Laender, S. Castano, U. Dayal, F. Casati, & J. P. M. de Oliverira (Eds.), Conceptual Modeling - ER 2009 (Vol. 5829, pp. 41–54). Berlin: Springer Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04840-1_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Becker, J., Eggert, M., & Schwittay, S. (2012). How to Evaluate the Practical Relevance of Business Process Compliance Checking Approaches? In D. C. Mattfeld & S. Robra-Bissantz (Eds.), Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik 2012 - Tagungsband der MKWI 2012 (pp. 849–861).Google Scholar
  15. Becker, A., Gruber, W., & Wohlert, D. (2006). Handbuch Marisk: Mindestanforderungen an Das Risiko-Management in Der Bankpraxis. Frankfurt: Knapp.Google Scholar
  16. Becker, J., & Schütte, R. (2004). Handelsinformationssysteme. Frankfurt: Redline Wirtschaft.Google Scholar
  17. Boella, G., Janssen, M., Hulstijn, J., Humphreys, L., & van der Torre, L. (2013). Managing legal interpretation in regulatory compliance. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law - ICAIL’13 (pp. 23–32). New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/2514601.2514605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bräuer, S., Delfmann, P., Dietrich, H.-A., & Steinhorst, M. (2013). Using a Generic Model Query Approach to Allow for Process Model Compliance Checking–An Algorithmic Perspective. In R. Alt & B. Franczyk (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI) 2013 (pp. 1245–1259). Leipzig: Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
  19. Buhl, H. U., Fridgen, G., Müller, G., & Röglinger, M. (2012). Business and information systems engineering : A complementary approach to information systems – what we can learn from the past and may conclude from present reflection on the future. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13, 236–253.Google Scholar
  20. Cabanillas, C., Resinas, M., & Ruiz-Cortés, A. (2010). Hints on how to face business process compliance. Ac-tas de los Talleres de las Jornadas de Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos, 4(4), 26–32.Google Scholar
  21. Caldwell, F. (2009). The Worldwide Economic Crisis Will Bring Real-Time Reporting for Risk Management. Stamford: Gartner Research, Gartner, Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Caldwell, F., Bace, J., & Lotto, R. (2009). U.S. Financial System Regulatory Overhaul Brings More Scrutiny. Stamford: Gartner Research, Gartner, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Davis, A. M. (1993). Software Requirements: Objects, Functions, and States. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  24. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Delfmann, P., Herwig, S., & Lis, Ł. (2009). Unified Enterprise Knowledge Representation with Conceptual Models - Capturing Corporate Language in Naming Conventions (Proc. of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS)). Arizona: Phoenix.Google Scholar
  26. Delfmann, P., Steinhorst, M., Dietrich, H.-A., & Becker, J. (2014). The generic model query language GMQL - conceptual specification, implementation, and runtime evaluation. Information Systems. doi:10.1016/j.is.2014.06.003.Google Scholar
  27. Diestel, R. (2010). Graph Theory. Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Dietrich, H.-A., Breuker, D., Steinhorst, M., Delfmann, P., & Becker, J. (2013). Developing graphical model editors for meta-modelling tools – requirements, conceptualisation, and implementation. Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, 8(2), 42–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dietrich, H.-A., Steinhorst, M., Becker, J., & Delfmann, P. (2011). Fast Pattern Matching in Conceptual Models - Evaluating and Extending a Generic Approach. In M. Nüttgens, O. Thomas, & B. Weber (Eds.), Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISA 2011) (Vol. 190, pp. 79–92). GI.Google Scholar
  30. Dijkman, R. M., La Rosa, M., & Reijers, H. A. (2012). Managing large collections of business process models - current techniques and challenges. Computers in Industry, 63(2), 91–97. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2011.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. El Kharbili, M., de Medeiros, A. K. A., Stein, S., & van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2008). Business Process Compliance Checking: Current State and Future Challenges. In P. Loos, M. Nüttgens, K. Turowsk, & D. Werth (Eds.), MobIS 2008 (Vol. 141, pp. 107–113). Saarbrücken, Germany: GI.Google Scholar
  32. Elgammal, A., Türetken, O., van den Heuvel, W.-J., & Papazoglou, M. P. (2010). Root-Cause Analysis of Design-Time Compliance Violations on the Basis of Property Patterns. In P. P. Maglio, M. Weske, J. Yang, & M. Fantinato (Eds.), ICSOC (Vol. 6470, pp. 17–31).Google Scholar
  33. Foerster, A., Engels, G., Schattkowsky, T., Van Der Straeten, R., & Forster, A. (2007). Verification of Business Process Quality Constraints Based on Visual Process Patterns. In First Joint IEEE/IFIP Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering (TASE’07) (pp. 197–208). Washington: IEEE. doi:10.1109/TASE.2007.56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Foerster, A., Engels, G., & Schattkowsky, T. (2005). Activity Diagram Patterns for Modeling Quality Constraints in Business Processes. In L. Briand & C. Williams (Eds.), Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (Vol. 3713, pp. 2–16). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/11557432_2
  35. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., & Vlissides, J. (1994). Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Amsterdam: Addison-Wesley Professional.Google Scholar
  36. Ghose, A., & Koliadis, G. (2007). Auditing Business Process Compliance. In B. Krämer, K.-J. Lin, & P. Narasimhan (Eds.), Service-Oriented Computing – ICSOC 2007 (Vol. 4749, pp. 169–180). Vienna: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74974-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Goedertier, S., & Vanthienen, J. (2006). Designing Compliant Business Processes with Obligations and Permissions. In J. Eder & S. Dustdar (Eds.), Business Process Management Workshops (Vol. 4103, pp. 5–14). Vienna: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/11837862_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Governatori, G., & Milosevic, Z. (2006). A formal analysis of a business contract language. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 15(4), 659–685. doi:10.1142/S0218843006001529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z., & Sadiq, S. (2006). Compliance Checking Between Business Processes and Business Contracts. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (pp. 221–232). Washington: IEEE Computer Society. doi:10.1109/EDOC.2006.22.Google Scholar
  40. Governatori, G., & Rotolo, A. (2010). A Conceptually Rich Model of Business Process Compliance. In Proceedings of the Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (pp. 3–12). Darlinghurst: Australian Computer Society, Inc.Google Scholar
  41. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.Google Scholar
  42. Höfferer, P. (2007). Achieving business process model interoperability using metamodels and ontologies. In H. Österle, J. Schelp, & R. Winter (Eds.), Proc. of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) (pp. 1620–1631). St. Gallen, Switzerland: University of St. Gallen.Google Scholar
  43. Hoffmann, J., Weber, I., & Governatori, G. (2009). On compliance checking for clausal constraints in annotated process models. Information Systems Frontiers, 14(2), 155–177. doi:10.1007/s10796-009-9179-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Knuplesch, D., Ly, L. T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Pfeifer, H., & Dadam, P. (2010). On Enabling Data-Aware Compliance Checking of Business Process Models. In Conceptual Modeling – ER 2010 (Vol. 6412, pp. 332–346). Vancouver: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16373-9_24.Google Scholar
  45. Kokash, N., & Arbab, F. (2009). Formal Behavioral Modeling and Compliance Analysis for Service-Oriented Systems. In F. S. Boer, M. M. Bonsangue, & E. Madelaine (Eds.), Formal Methods for Components and Objects (Vol. 5751, pp. 21–41). Sophia Antipolis: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04167-9_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kotonya, G., & Sommerville, I. (1998). Requirements Engineering - Processes and Techniques. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  47. Kumar, A., & Liu, R. (2008). A Rule-Based Framework Using Role Patterns for Business Process Compliance. In N. Bassiliades, G. Governatori, & A. Paschke (Eds.), Rule Representation, Interchange and Reasoning on the Web (Vol. 5321, pp. 58–72). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88808-6_9
  48. Küster, J. M., Ryndina, K., & Gall, H. (2007). Generation of Business Process Models for Object Life Cycle Compliance. In G. Alonso, P. Dadam, & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Business Process Management (Vol. 4714, pp. 165–181). Brisbane: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Liu, Y., Müller, S., & Xu, K. (2007). A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Systems Journal, 46(2), 335–361. doi:10.1147/sj.462.0335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lu, R., Sadiq, S., & Governatori, G. (2008a). Measurement of compliance distance in business processes. Information Systems Management, 25(4), 344–355. doi:10.1080/10580530802384613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lu, R., Sadiq, S., & Governatori, G. (2008b). Compliance Aware Business Process Design. In A. ter Hofstede, B. Benatallah, & H.-Y. Paik (Eds.), Business Process Management Workshops (Vol. 4928, pp. 120–131). Brisbane: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78238-4_14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ly, L. T., Göser, K., Rinderle-Ma, S., & Dadam, P. (2008a). Compliance of Semantic Constraints - A Requirements Analysis for Process Management Systems. In Proc. 1st Int’l Workshop on Governance, Risk and Compliance - Applications in Information Systems (GRCIS’08).Google Scholar
  53. Ly, L. T., Rinderle, S., & Dadam, P. (2008b). Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 64(1), 3–23. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2007.06.007.
  54. Ly, L. T., Rinderle, S., & Dadam, P. (2006). Semantic Correctness in Adaptive Process Management Systems. In S. Dustdar, J. L. Fiadeiro, & A. P. Sheth (Eds.), Business Process Management (Vol. 4102, pp. 193–208). Vienna: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/11841760_14.
  55. Ly, L. T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Göser, K., & Dadam, P. (2012). On enabling integrated process compliance with semantic constraints in process management systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 14(2), 195–219. doi:10.1007/s10796-009-9185-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ly, L. T., Rinderle-Ma, S., & Dadam, P. (2010). Design and Verification of Instantiable Compliance Rule Graphs in Process-Aware Information Systems. In B. Pernici (Ed.), Advanced Information Systems Engineering (Vol. 6051, pp. 9–23). Hammamet: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13094-6_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mendling, J. (2007). Detection and Prediction of Errors in EPC Business Process Models (Doctoral dissertation). WU Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration.Google Scholar
  58. Monakova, G., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Moser, S., & Schäfers, K. (2009). Verifying Business Rules Using an SMT Solver for BPEL Processes. In W. Abramowicz, L. Maciaszek, R. Kowalczyk, & A. Speck (Eds.), Business process, servicescomputing and intelligent service management (Vol. 147, pp. 81–94). Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI).Google Scholar
  59. Müller, J. (2010). Strukturbasierte Verifikation von BPMN-Modellen (Doctoral dissertation). Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.Google Scholar
  60. OASIS. (2007). Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.pdf
  61. Object Management Group. (2005). Unified Modeling Language Infrastructure. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.0/Infrastructure/PDF/
  62. Object Management Group. (2011). Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN). Retrieved April 30, 2013, from http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/PDF
  63. Opromolla, G. (2009). Facing the financial crisis: Bank of Italy’s implementing regulation on hedge funds. Journal of Investment Compliance, 10(2), 41–44. doi:10.1108/15285810910971274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information System, 24(3), 45–77. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Peterson, J. L. (1977). Petri nets. ACM Computing Surveys, 9(3), 223–252. doi:10.1145/356698.356702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Raduescu, C., Tan, H. M., Jayaganesh, M., Bandara, W., zur Muehlen, M., & Lippe, S. (2006). A framework of issues in large process modeling projects. In Proc. of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS). Göteborg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  67. Rinderle-Ma, S., Ly, L. T., & Dadam, P. (2008). Business process compliance. EMISA Forum, 28(2), 24–29.Google Scholar
  68. Rosemann, M., & Vessey, I. (2008). Toward improving the relevance of information systems research to practice: The role of applicability checks. MIS Quarterly, 32(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  69. Sadiq, S., Governatori, G., & Namiri, K. (2007). Modeling Control Objectives for Business Process Compliance. In G. Alonso, P. Dadam, & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Business Process Management (Vol. 4714, pp. 149–164). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_12
  70. Scheer, A.-W. (2000). ARIS - Business Process Modeling (3rd ed.). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schleicher, D., Anstett, T., Leymann, F., & Schumm, D. (2010). Compliant Business Process Design Using Refinement Layers. In R. Meersman, T. Dillon, & P. Herrero (Eds.), On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2010 (Vol. 6426, pp. 114–131). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16934-2_11
  72. Schumm, D., Turetken, O., Kokash, N., Elgammal, A., Leymann, F., & Van Den Heuvel, W.-J. (2010). Business Process Compliance Through Reusable Units of Compliant Processes. In F. Daniel & F. M. Facca (Eds.), Current Trends in Web Engineering (Vol. 6385, pp. 325–337). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  74. Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N., & Rook, D. W. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  75. Thomas, O., & Fellmann, M. (2009). Semantic process modeling – design and implementation of an ontology-based representation of business processes. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 1(6), 438–451. doi:10.1007/s12599-009-0078-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tosatto, S. C., Governatori, G., Kelsen, P., & van der Torre, L. (2012). Business Process Compliance is Hard (pp. 1–14).Google Scholar
  77. Tosatto, S. C., Kharbili, M. El, Governatori, G., Kelsen, P., Ma, Q., & van der Torre, L. (2013). Algorithms for Basic Compliance Problems. In IEEE Sixth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (pp. 2–7). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICSTW.2013.6
  78. Van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2013). Business process management: A comprehensive survey. ISRN Software Engineering, 2013, 1–37. doi:10.1155/2013/507984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wang, J., Jin, T., Wong, R. K., & Wen, L. (2013). Querying business process model repositories. World Wide Web, 17(3), 427–454. doi:10.1007/s11280-013-0210-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Weiß, B., & Winkelmann, A. (2011). A Metamodel Based Perspective on the Adaptation of a Semantic Business Process Modeling Language to the Financial Sector. In 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). IEEE. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2011.16
  82. Wolter, C., & Meinel, C. (2010). An approach to capture authorisation requirements in business processes. Requirements Engineering, 15(4), 359–373. doi:10.1007/s00766-010-0103-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wolter, C., Miseldine, P., & Meinel, C. (2009). Verification of Business Process Entailment Constraints Using SPIN. In F. Massacci, S. Redwine Jr., & N. Zannone (Eds.), Engineering Secure Software and Systems (Vol. 5429, pp. 1–15). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00199-4_1
  84. Worzberger, R., Kurpick, T., & Heer, T. (2008a). Checking Correctness and Compliance of Integrated Process Models. In Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing, 2008. SYNASC’08. 10th International Symposium on (pp. 576–583). doi:10.1109/SYNASC.2008.10
  85. Worzberger, R., Kurpick, T., & Heer, T. (2008b). On Correctness, Compliance and Consistency of Process Models. In Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, 2008. WETICE’08. IEEE 17th (pp. 251–252). doi:10.1109/WETICE.2008.9
  86. Zoet, M., Welke, R., Versendaal, J., & Ravesteyn, P. (2009). Aligning Risk Management and Compliance Considerations with Business Process Development. In T. Noia & F. Buccafurri (Eds.), E-Commerce and Web Technologies (Vol. 5692, pp. 157–168). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03964-5_16

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jörg Becker
    • 1
  • Patrick Delfmann
    • 1
  • Hanns-Alexander Dietrich
    • 1
  • Matthias Steinhorst
    • 1
  • Mathias Eggert
    • 1
  1. 1.European Research Center for Information Systems (ERCIS)University of MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations