vrBPMN* and FM: An Approach to Model Business Process Line

  • Geraldo LandreEmail author
  • Edilson Palma
  • Débora Maria Paiva
  • Elisa Yumi Nakagawa
  • Maria Istela Cagnin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 202)


Recently, Business Process Management (BPM) has increasing demanded reuse of business process models. In order to represent these models, diverse techniques have been used, such as the variability management and business process configuration, arising the Business Process Line (BPL) area. In order to model BPL, the joint use of vrBPMN (varant-rich Business Process Model and Notation) and Feature Model (FM) has been considered as a relevant alternative. However, there is a kind of FM elements that does not have a properly correspondent in vrBPMN, that is, the IOR element. In addition to that, FM and vrBPMN have some redundant informations. The main contribution of this paper is to propose an extension to the vrBPMN notation, named vrBPMN*, and, together with FM, makes it possible to adequately model BPL. We conducted an empirical study to analyze the viability of using vrPBMN* and FM to model business process, as well as their building time and correctness. As main results, we have observed that the proposed notation favours business process modeling, reducing time and increasing correctness of produced models.


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W., Lohmann, N., La Rosa, M., Xu, J.: Correctness ensuring process configuration: an approach based on partner synthesis. In: Hull, R., Mendling, J., Tai, S. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6336, pp. 95–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boffoli, N., Caivano, D., Castelluccia, D., Visaggio, G.: Driving flexibility and consistency of business processes by means of product-line engineering and decision tables. In: 3rd International Workshop on Product Line Approaches in Software Engineering, Zurich, pp. 33–36 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chang, J.F.: Business Process Management System - Strategy and Implementation, 1st edn. Auerbach Publications, Boca Raton (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chinosi, M., Trombetta, A.: Bpmn: an introduction to the standard. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 34(1), 124–134 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gottschalk, F., Aalst, W., Jansen-Vullers, M.: Configurable process models–a foundational approach. In: Becker, J., Delfmann, P. (eds.) Reference Modeling, pp. 59–77. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    OMG Object Management Group: Documents associated with uml version 2 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grökovic, G., Parreiras, F., Gaevic, D.: Modeling and validation of business process families. Inf. Syst. 38(5), 709–726 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow Management: Modeling Concepts, Architecture and Implementation. International Thomson Computer Press, London (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kang, K.C., Cohen, S.G., Hess, J.A., Novak, W.E., Peterson, A.S.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA): feasibility study. Technical report, SEI (1990)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A., Mendling, J.: Configurable multi-perspective business process models. Inf. Syst. 36(2), 313–340 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ladeira, S., Penteado, R., Braga, R., Cagnin, M.I.: Business modelling reuse based on views: a case study. In: 22nd Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, Brazil, pp. 140–155 (2008). (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laudon, K., Laudon, J.: Essentials of Management Information Systems, 10th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pohl, K., Bockle, G., van der Linden, F.J.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rolland, C., Nurcan, S.: Business process lines to deal with the variability. In: 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schnieders, A., Puhlmann, F.: Variability mechanisms in e-business process families. In: International Conference on Business Information Systems, Austria, pp. 583–601 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Hst, M., Ohlsson, M., Regnell, B., Wessln, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geraldo Landre
    • 1
    Email author
  • Edilson Palma
    • 1
  • Débora Maria Paiva
    • 1
  • Elisa Yumi Nakagawa
    • 2
  • Maria Istela Cagnin
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing College, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS)Campo GrandeBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Computer SystemsUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São CarlosBrazil

Personalised recommendations