Beyond Control-Flow: Extending Business Process Configuration to Roles and Objects

  • Marcello La Rosa
  • Marlon Dumas
  • Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede
  • Jan Mendling
  • Florian Gottschalk
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5231)

Abstract

A configurable process model is an integrated representation of multiple variants of a business process. It is designed to be individualized to meet a particular set of requirements. As such, configurable process models promote systematic reuse of proven or common practices. Existing notations for configurable process modeling focus on capturing tasks and control-flow dependencies, neglecting equally important aspects of business processes such as data flow, material flow and resource management. This paper fills this gap by proposing an integrated meta-model for configurable processes with advanced features for capturing resources involved in the performance of tasks (through task-role associations) as well as flow of data and physical artifacts (through task-object associations). Although embodied as an extension of a popular process modeling notation, namely EPC, the meta-model is defined in an abstract and formal manner to make it applicable to other notations.

Keywords

Process model configuration resource object flow 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.M.: Workflow Management: Models, Methods, and Systems. MIT press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: Yet Another Workflow Language. Information Systems 30(4), 245–275 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alves, A., et al.: Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) ver. 2.0, Committee Specification (January 31, 2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Dreiling, A., Knackstedt, R., Kuropka, D.: Configurative Process Modeling – Outlining an Approach to increased Business Process Model Usability. In: Proceedings of the 15th IRMA International Conference, New Orleans, Gabler (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Curran, T., Keller, G.: SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding the Business Process Reference Model, Upper Saddle River (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Engels, G., Förster, A., Heckel, R., Thöne, S.: Process Modeling Using UML. In: Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M. (eds.) Process-Aware Information Systems, pp. 85–117. Wiley, Chichester (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: Configurable Process Models – A Foundational Approach. In: Reference Modeling. Efficient Information Systems Design Through Reuse of Information Models, pp. 59–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable Workflow Models. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 17(2), 177–221 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow Management: Modeling Concepts, Architecture, and Implementation. International Thomson Computer Press, London (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J., Gottschalk, F.: Beyond Control-flow: Extending Business Process Configuration to Resources and Objects (2007), Available at QUT ePrints, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00011240
  11. 11.
    La Rosa, M., Lux, J., Seidel, S., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-driven Configuration of Reference Process Models. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 424–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mendling, J., La Rosa, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Correctness of Business Process Models with Roles and Objects (2008), Available at QUT ePrints, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00013172
  13. 13.
    Mühlen, M.z.: Organizational Management in Workflow Applications - Issues and Perspectives. Information Technology and Management 5(3–4), 271–291 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex: Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflow without Loosing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 10(2), 93–129 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A Configurable Reference Modelling Language. Information Systems 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D.: Workflow Resource Patterns: Identification, Representation and Tool Support. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 216–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Scheer, A.W.: ARIS - Business Process Frameworks, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stephens, S.: The Supply Chain Council and the SCOR Reference Model. Supply Chain Management - An International Journal 1(1), 9–13 (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    White, S.A., et al.: Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), Version 1.0 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcello La Rosa
    • 1
  • Marlon Dumas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede
    • 1
  • Jan Mendling
    • 1
  • Florian Gottschalk
    • 3
  1. 1.Queensland University of TechnologyAustralia
  2. 2.University of TartuEstonia
  3. 3.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations