Ontology-Driven Process Specialization

  • Abderrahmane LeshobEmail author
  • Hafedh Mili
  • Anis Boubaker
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 209)


Business process design is an important activity for the planning and analysis of information systems that support the organization’s business processes. Our goal is to help business analysts produce detailed models of the business processes that best reflect the needs of their organizations. To this end, we propose to, a) leverage the best practices in terms of a catalog of generic business processes, and b) provide analysts with tools to customize those processes by generating, on-demand, new process variants around automatically identified process variation points. We use business patterns from the Resource Event Agent ontology to identify variation points, and to codify the model transformations inherent in the generation of the process variants. We developed a prototype, showing the computational feasibility of the approach. Early feedback from a case study with three Business Process Management (BPM) experts validated the relevance of the variation points, and the correctness of corresponding transformations, within the context of key Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) processes. In this paper, we summarize the approach and report of the results of a larger experiment, gaining insights into the strengths and weaknesses of our approach, and suggesting avenues for improvement.


Business Process Model Transformation Transformation Rule Variation Point Business Process Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Carlson, W.M.: Business information analysis and integration technique (BIAIT): the new horizon. ACM SIGMIS Database 10(4), 3–9 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Malone, T.W., Crowston, K., Herman, G.: Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook. MIT Press (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coad, P., De Luca, J., Lefebvre, E.: Java Modeling In Color With UML: Enterprise Components and Process. Prentice Hall PTR (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: the Provop approach. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 22(6–7), 519–546 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schnieders, A., Puhlmann, F.: Variability mechanisms in E-business process families. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS 2006), pp. 583–601 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curtis, B., Kellner, M.I., Over, J.: Process modeling. Commun. ACM 35, 75–90 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wohed, P.: Conceptual patterns - A consolidation of coad’s and wohed’s approaches. In: Bouzeghoub, M., Kedad, Z., Métais, E. (eds.) NLDB 2000. LNCS, vol. 1959, pp. 340–351. Springer, Heidelberg (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leshob, A.: Representating, classifying and specializing business processes. PhD thesis, UQAM, Montreal (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McCarthy, W.E.: The REA accounting model: A generalized framework for accounting systems in a shared data environment. Accounting Review 57(3), 554–578 (1982)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hruby, P.: Model-Driven Design Using Business Patterns. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yu, S.C.: The Structure of Accounting Theory. The University Press of Florida (1976)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Geerts, G., McCarthy, W.: The ontological foundation of REA enterprise information systems. Annual Meeting of the American Accounting Association, pp. 1–34, March 2000Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Curran, T.A., Keller, G., Ladd, A.: SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding the Business Process Reference Model. Prentice Hall (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    OMG, Business Process Definition MetaModel (BPDM) (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG, Organization Structure Metamodel (OSM) (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murray, M.: Discover Logistics with SAP ERP. SAP PRESS (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    David, J.S.: Three events that define an REA methodology for systems analysis, design, and implementation. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Accounting Association, Dallas, TX (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., de Medeiros, A.K.A., Weijters, A.J.M.M.: Process equivalence: comparing two process models based on observed behavior. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 129–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gordijn, J., Akkermans, H.: Designing and Evaluating E-Business Models. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16, 11–17 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reijers, H.A., Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Process design and redesign. In: Process-Aware Information Systems: Bridging People and Software through Process Technology, pp. 207–234. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Engels, G., Heckel, R., Küster, J.M., Groenewegen, L.: Consistency-preserving model evolution through transformations. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002. LNCS, vol. 2460, pp. 212–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Varró, D., Pataricza, A.: Automated formal verification of model tranformations. In: Critical Systems Development in UML, no. Otka 038027, pp. 63–78. Technische Universität München (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abderrahmane Leshob
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Hafedh Mili
    • 2
  • Anis Boubaker
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Quebec at RimouskiRimouskiCanada
  2. 2.University of Quebec at MontrealMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations