Coordinating Interorganizational Workflows Based on Process-Views

  • Minxin Shen
  • Duen-Ren Liu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2113)

Abstract

In multi-enterprise cooperation, an enterprise must monitor the progress of private processes as well as those of the partners to streamline interorganizational workflows. In this work, a process-view model, which extends beyond the conventional activity-based process model, is applied to design workflows across multiple enterprises. A process-view is an abstraction of an implemented process. An enterprise can design various process-views for different partners according to diverse commercial relationships, and establish an integrated process that is comprised of private processes as well as the process-views that these partners provide. Participatory enterprises can obtain appropriate progress information from their own integrated processes, allowing them to collaborate more effectively. Furthermore, interorganizational workflows are coordinated through virtual states of process-views. This work develops a regulated approach to map the states between private processes and process-views. The proposed approach enhances prevalent activity-based process models to be adapted in open and collaborative environments.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A.P. Barros and A.H.M. ter Hofstede, “Towards the Construction of Workflow-Suitable Conceptual Modelling Techniques”, Information Systems Journal, 8(4), pp. 313–337, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. Casati and A. Discenza, “Modeling and Managing Interactions among Business Processes”, Journal of Systems Integration, 10(2), pp. 145–168, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D.K.W. Chiu, K. Karlapalem, and Q. Li, “Views for Inter-Organization Workflow in an Ecommerce Environment”, Proceedings of the 9th IFIP Working Conference on Database Semantics (DS-9), Hong Kong, China, April 24-28, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Georgakopoulos, M. Hornick, and A. Sheth, “An Overview of Workflow Management-from Process Modeling to Workflow Automation Infrastructure”, Distributed and Parallel Databases, 3(2), pp. 119–153, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Georgakopoulos, H. Schuster, A. Cichocki, and D. Baker, “Managing Process and Service Fusion in Virtual Enterprises”, Information Systems, 24(6), pp. 429–456, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Grefen, K. Aberer, Y. Hoffner, and H. Ludwig, “CrossFlow: Cross-Organizational Workflow Management in Dynamic Virtual Enterprises”, Computer Systems Science & Engineering, 15(5), pp. 277–290, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Lazcano, G. Alonso, H. Schuldt, and C. Schuler, “The WISE Approach to Electronic Commerce”, Computer Systems Science & Engineering, 15(5), pp. 345–357, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Lindert and W. Deiters, “Modeling Inter-Organizational Processes with Process Model Fragments”, Proceedings of GI workshop Informatik’99, Paderborn, Germany, Oct. 6, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D.-R. Liu and M. Shen, “Modeling Workflows with a Process-View Approach”, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Applications (DASFAA’01), pp. 260–267, Hong Kong, China, April 18-22, 2001.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M.z. Muehlen and F. Klien, “AFRICA: Workflow Interoperability Based on XMLMessages”, Proceedings of CAiSE’00 workshop on Infrastructures for Dynamic Business-to-Business Service Outsourcing (IDSO’00), Stockholm, Sweden, June5, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Object Management Group, “Workflow Management Facility”, Document number formal/00-05-02, April 2000.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Schulz and Z. Milosevic, “Architecting Cross-Organizational B2B Interactions”, Proceedings of the 4th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2000), pp. 92–101, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W.M.P. van der Aalst, “Process-Oriented Architectures for Electronic Commerce and Interorganizational Workflow”, Information Systems, 24(8), pp. 639–671, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Workflow Management Coalition, “Interoperability Wf-XML Binding”, Technical report WfMC TC-1023, May 1, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Workflow Management Coalition, “The Workflow Reference Model”, Technical report WfMC TC-1003, Jan. 19, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Minxin Shen
    • 1
  • Duen-Ren Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information Management, National Chiao Tung UniversityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations