The temporal perspective in business process modeling: a survey and research challenges

  • Saoussen Cheikhrouhou
  • Slim Kallel
  • Nawal Guermouche
  • Mohamed Jmaiel
Original Research Paper


One key perspective when dealing with business process management is time. All business experts agree upon the fact that time is a key resource for processes within organisations. Indeed, time managing is an effective cost reduction strategy and thus ensures profit maximization for organisations. As a result, business managers, researchers, and academicians in management are striving to have full-support of temporal aspects in current business process management suites. Consequently, modeling and managing temporal requirements in the business process field is becoming a topic of intensive research. This paper presents a survey of the existing approaches to specifying and verifying the temporal perspective in business processes. Furthermore, this paper provides a critical and comparative analysis of the studied approaches and stands out major challenges to be addressed to substantially enhance the time management in the business process management field.


Temporal constraints and dependencies Business process modeling (BPM) Workflow Web service composition Inter-organizational business process (IOBP) 


  1. 1.
    Benatallah B, Casati F, Ponge J, Toumani F (2005) On temporal abstractions of web service protocols. In: Proceedings of the 17th conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE), vol 161, pp 13–17. CEUR-WS.orgGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benatallah B, Casati F, Toumani F (2004) Analysis and management of web service protocols. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on conceptual modeling, vol 3288 of LNCS. Springer, pp 524–541Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berthomieu B, Bodeveix J-P, Farail P, Filali M, Garavel H, Gaufillet P, Lang F, Ve rnadat F (2008) Fiacre: an intermediate language for model verification in the topcased environment. In: Proceedings of the 4th European Congress in Embedded Real Time Software, FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berthomieu B, Ribet P-O, Vernadat F (2004) The tool TINA construction of abstract state spaces for petri nets and time petri nets. Int J Prod Res 42(14):2741–2756CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bettini C, Wang XS, Jajodia S (2002) Temporal reasoning in workflow systems. Distrib Parallel Databases 11(3):269–306CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheikhrouhou S, Kallel S, Guermouche N, Jmaiel M (2013) A survey on time-aware business process modeling. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on enterprise information systems. SCITEPRESSGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheikhrouhou S, Kallel S, Guermouche N, Jmaiel M (2013) Time-aware automatic process view generation. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international conference on e-business engineering. IEEE Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheikhrouhou S, Kallel S, Guermouche N, Jmaiel M (2013) Toward a time-centric modeling of business processes in BPMN 2.0. In: The 14th international conference on information integration and web-based applications and services, IIWAS ’13. ACMGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clancy DJ, Kuipers B (1998) Qualitative simulation as a temporally-extended constraint satisfaction problem. In: Proceedings of the fifteenth national conference on artificial intelligence and tenth innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference (AAAI/IAAI). AAAI Press/The MIT Press, pp 240–247Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Combi C, Gozzi M, Juárez JM, Oliboni B, Pozzi G (2007) Conceptual modeling of temporal clinical workflows. In: Proceedings of the 14th international symposium on temporal representation and reasoning (TIME). IEEE Computer Society, pp 70–81Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Combi C, Posenato R (2009) Controllability in temporal conceptual workflow schemata. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on business process management (BPM), vol 5701 of LNCS. Springer, pp 64–79Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Combi C, Posenato R (2010) Towards temporal controllabilities for Workflow Schemata. In: Proceedings of the 17th international symposium on temporal representation and reasoning (TIME). IEEE Computer Society, pp 129–136Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dorn C, Dustdar S (2012) Weighted fuzzy clustering for capability-driven service aggregation. SOCA 6(2):83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Du Y, Xiong P, Fan Y, Li X (2011) Dynamic checking and solution to temporal violations in concurrent workflow processes. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A 41(6):1166–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dustdar S, Schreiner W (2005) A survey on web services composition. IJWGS 1(1):1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eder J, Tahamtan A (2008) Temporal conformance of federated choreographies. In: Bhowmick SS, Küng J, Wagner R (eds) Proceedings of the 19th international conference on database and expert systems applications (DEXA), vol 5181 of LNCS. Springer, pp 668–675Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eder J, Tahamtan A (2008) Temporal consistency of view based interorganizational workflows. In: Kaschek R, Kop C, Steinberger C, Fliedl G (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd international united information systems conference on information systems and e-business technologies (UNISCON), vol 5 of LNBIP. Springer, pp 96–107Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Förster A, Engels G, Schattkowsky T (2005) Activity diagram patterns for modeling quality constraints in business processes. In: Briand LC, Williams C (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international conference on model driven engineering languages and systems (MoDELS), vol 3713 of LNCS. Springer, pp 2–16Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Förster A, Engels G, Schattkowsky T, Straeten RVD (2007) Verification of business process quality constraints based on visual process patterns. In: Proceedings of the 1st joint IEEE/IFIP symposium on theoretical aspects of software engineering (TASE). IEEE Computer Society, pp 197–208Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gagné D, Trudel A (2009) Time-BPMN. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on commerce and enterprise computing (CEC). IEEE Computer Society, pp 361–367Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Godary K (2008) LPT: little parametric tool, outil pour la validation d’une borne temporelle paramétrée. In: CIFA’08: Conférence Internationale Francophone d’Automatique, Bucarest, Roumanie, Sept 2008Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guermouche N (2010) Etude des Interactions Temporisées dans la Composition de Services Web. PhD thesis, Université Henri PoincaréGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guermouche N, Zilio SD (2012) Towards timed requirement verification for service choreographies. In: Proceedings of the 8th IEEE international conference on collaborative computing: networking, applications and worksharing, p 10, USA, Oct 2012Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huai W, Liu X, Sun H (2010) Towards trustworthy composite service through business process model verification. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on ubiquitous intelligence and computing and 7th international conference on autonomic and trusted computing (UIC/ATC), pp 422–427Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kallel S, Charfi A, Dinkelaker T, Mezini M, Jmaiel M (2009) Specifying and monitoring temporal properties in web services compositions. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE European conference on web services. IEEE Computer Society, pp 148–157Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kanso B, Taha S (2012) Temporal constraint support for OCL. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on software language engineering (SLE), Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 83–103Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kazhamiakin R, Pandya PK, Pistore M (2006) Representation, verification, and computation of timed properties in web. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on web services (ICWS). IEEE Computer Society, pp 497–504Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kazhamiakin R, Pandya PK, Pistore M (2006) Timed modelling and analysis in web service compositions. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on availability, reliability and security (ARES). IEEE Computer Society, pp 840–846Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ling S, Schmidt H (2000) Time Petri nets for workflow modelling and analysis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, vol 4 IEEE, pp 3039–3044Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lu R, Sadiq SW (2007) A survey of comparative business process modeling approaches. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on business information systems (BIS), vol 4439 of LNCS. Springer, pp 82–94Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lu R, Sadiq SW, Governatori G, Yang X (2009) Defining adaptation constraints for business process variants. In: Business information systems, 12th international conference, BIS 2009, Poznan, Poland, April 27–29, 2009. Proceedings, vol 21 of LNBIP, pp 145–156Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lu R, Sadiq SW, Padmanabhan V, Governatori G (2006) Using a temporal constraint network for business process execution. In: Database technologies 2006, Proceedings of the 17th Australasian database conference, ADC 2006, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia, Jan 16–19 2006, vol 49 of CRPIT, pp 157–166. Australian Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Makni M, Hadj-Alouane NB, Tata S, Yeddes MM (2011) Negotiating deadline constraints in inter-organizational logistic systems: a healthcare case study. In: Proceedings of the international workshops and education track on business process management workshops (BPM), vol 100 of LNBIP. Springer, pp 108–118Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Makni M, Tata S, Yeddes MM, Hadj-Alouane NB (2010) Satisfaction and Coherence of deadline constraints in inter-organizational workflows. In: Proceedings of the confederated international conferences: CoopIS on the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2010, vol 6426 of LNCS. Springer, pp 523–539Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marjanovic O (2000) Dynamic verification of temporal constraints in production workflows. In: Proceedings of the Australasian database conference, pp 74–81. IEEE Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Object Management Group (OMG) (2008) Business process modeling notation (BPMN), version 1.1Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pesic M, Schonenberg MH, Sidorova N, van der Aalst WMP (2007) Constraint-based workflow models: change made easy. In: Proceedings of the confederated international conferences on the move to meaningful internet systems, vol 4803 of LNCS. Springer, pp 77–94Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang F (2004) Formal verification of timed systems: a survey and perspective. In: Proceedings of the IEEE, pp 1283–1305, Aug 2004Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang Z, Xu X (2012) A sharing-oriented service selection and scheduling approach for the optimization of resource utilization. SOCA 6(1):15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Watahiki K, Ishikawa F, Hiraishi K (2011) Formal verification of business processes with temporal and resource constraints. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. IEEE, pp 1173–1180Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wong PYH, Gibbons J (2009) A relative timed semantics for BPMN. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 229(2):59–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Xu B, Luo S, Yan Y, Sun K (2012) Towards efficiency of qos-driven semantic web service composition for large-scale service-oriented systems. SOCA 6(1):1–13CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saoussen Cheikhrouhou
    • 1
  • Slim Kallel
    • 1
  • Nawal Guermouche
    • 2
    • 3
  • Mohamed Jmaiel
    • 1
  1. 1.ReDCAD Laboratory National Engineering School of SfaxUniversity of SfaxSfaxTunisia
  2. 2.CNRS, LAASToulouseFrance
  3. 3.INSA, LAASUniv de ToulouseToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations