Advertisement

Hybrid Process Technologies in the Financial Sector: The Case of BRFkredit

  • Søren DeboisEmail author
  • Thomas Hildebrandt
  • Morten Marquard
  • Tijs Slaats
Chapter
Part of the Management for Professionals book series (MANAGPROF)

Abstract

  1. (a)

    Situation faced: Exformatics, a Danish adaptive case-management vendor, wanted to leverage declarative process tools to support the flexible processes found at BRFkredit. However, switching from the more common flow-based notations to a declarative notation brought new challenges in terms of understandability. We undertook the project described in this chapter to investigate and address these challenges.

     
  2. (b)

    Action taken: We started our investigation by having several full-day and half-day meetings to discuss BRFkredit’s requirements. Based on these requirements, we proposed and developed a prototype hybrid process-modelling approach with which models are defined declaratively, but the possible behavior of the model can be viewed and investigated using flow-based notions. The prototype was then presented to BRFkredit for feedback.

     
  3. (c)

    Results achieved: Our investigation helped to clarify the requirements for making declarative process models understandable to end users at BRFkredit and showed how a hybrid approach could be used to satisfy these requirements. Based on these insights, we developed tools to enhance our existing declarative modelling framework with flow-based visualizations.

     
  4. (d)

    Lessons learned: Different stakeholders have different needs and preferred levels of abstraction when process models are used as tools for communication. However, one model that seems to fit most situations is a simple no-branches sequential swimlane diagram that was extracted automatically from a more detailed declarative model. These observations enabled Exformatics to enhance its declarative modelling framework to make it more attractive to end-users.

     

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the substantial resources set aside by BRFkredit to support this study, in particular the personal commitment of Thomas Bo Nielsen and Younes Nielsen.

References

  1. Brocke, J. v., Zelt, S., & Schmiedel, T. (2016). On the role of context in business process management. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 486–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. De Giacomo, G., Dumas, M., Maggi, F. M., & Montali, M. (2015). Declarative process modeling in BPMN. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE 2015). Google Scholar
  3. De Smedt, J., Vanden Broucke, S. K. L. M., De Weerdt, J., & Vanthienen, J. (2015). A full R/I-net construct lexicon for declare constraints. SSRN 2572869.Google Scholar
  4. Debois, S, Hildebrandt, T., Marquard, M., & Slaats, T. (2014). A case for declarative process modelling: Agile development of a grant application system. In International Workshop on adaptive case management and other non-workflow approaches to BPM.Google Scholar
  5. Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. A. (2013). Fundamentals of business process management. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Haisjackl, C., Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Hadar, I., Reichert, M., Pinggera, J., & Weber, B. (2013). Making sense of declarative process models: Common strategies and typical pitfalls. In S. Nurcan, H. A. Proper, P. Soffer, J. Krogstie, R. Schmidt, T. Halpin, & I. Bider (Eds.), BMMDS/EMMSAD, volume 147 of Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing (pp. 2–17). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Hildebrandt, T., & Mukkamala, R. R. (2010). Declarative event-based workflow as distributed dynamic condition response graphs. In Post-proceedings of PLACES 2010.Google Scholar
  8. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R. R., & Slaats, T. (2011). Safe distribution of declarative processes. In Proceedings of the 9th International conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, SEFM’11 (pp. 237–252). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Marquard, M., Shahzad, M., & Slaats, T. (2015). Web-based modelling and collaborative simulation of declarative processes. In Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2015).Google Scholar
  10. Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., & van der W. M. P. Aalst (2007). DECLARE: Full support for loosely-structured processes. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International enterprise distributed object computing conference. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  11. Prescher, J., Di Ciccio, C., & Mendling, J. (2014, November 19–21). From declarative processes to imperative models. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Data-driven Process Discovery and Analysis (SIMPDA 2014), Milan, Italy, pp. 162–173.Google Scholar
  12. Reijers, H. A., Slaats, T., & Stahl, C. (2013). Declarative modeling—An academic dream or the future for BPM? In F. Daniel, J. Wang, & B. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2013), volume 8094 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 307–322). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Sadiq, S., Sadiq, W., & Orlowska, M. (2001). Pockets of flexibility in workflow specification. In H. S. Kunii, S. Jajodia, & A. Sølvberg (Eds.), Conceptual modeling—ER 2001, volume 2224 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 513–526). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. van der Aalst, W. M. P., Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A. H. M., Pesic, M., & Schonenberg, H. (2009). Flexibility as a service. In Database systems for advanced applications, volume 5667 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 319–333). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Westergaard, M., & Slaats, T.. (2013, August 26–30). Mixing paradigms for more comprehensible models. In Business Process Management—11th International Conference, BPM 2013, Proceedings. Beijing, China, pp. 283–290.Google Scholar
  16. Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B., Mendling, J., & Reijers, H. A.(2011). Assessing the impact of hierarchy on model—a cognitive perspective. In EESSMod.Google Scholar
  17. Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Haisjackl, C., Pinggera, J., Reichert, M., & Weber, B. (2014). Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models. Software & Systems Modeling, 14, 1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Søren Debois
    • 1
    Email author
  • Thomas Hildebrandt
    • 2
  • Morten Marquard
    • 3
  • Tijs Slaats
    • 2
  1. 1.Exformatics/IT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.IT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  3. 3.Exformatics A/SCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations