Advertisement

Integrating Complex Events for Collaborating and Dynamically Changing Business Processes

  • Rainer von Ammon
  • Thomas Ertlmaier
  • Opher Etzion
  • Alexander Kofman
  • Thomas Paulus
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6275)

Abstract

Business processes must become agile, respond to changes in the business environment in a timely manner and quickly adapt themselves to new conditions. Event-Driven Business Process Management (ED-BPM) is an enhancement of Business Process Management (BPM) by concepts of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) and Complex Event Processing (CEP). The most important enhancement is the integration of services accessible via the Internet that fire events into global event clouds. The events can be processed by event processing platforms for aggregating the information into higher value complex business events. These events can be modeled in a business process execution language within a process driven Business Process Management System (BPMS) to trigger changes in control flow of a process or start other services. A reference model and a reference architecture for ED-BPM are presented, based on the NEXOF Reference Architecture. A taxonomy for classifying changes to process flow is proposed. Enhancements have to be applied to the existing standards in the BPM field, including both the design-time and the runtime. A scenario from the banking domain illustrates the main concepts and principles.

Keywords

Business Process Management Complex Event Processing Business Activity Monitoring Software as a Service Event Driven Architectures Business Process Execution Language Business Process Modeling Notation 

References

  1. 1.
    European Future Internet Portal, http://www.future-internet.eu
  2. 2.
    The Future of Internet, http://www.fi-bled.eu
  3. 3.
    Li, M.-S., Crave, S., Müller, J.P., Willmott, S.: The Internet of Services: Vision, Scope and Issues. In: eChallenges e-2008 Paper No. 143; eChallenges e-2008 Paper No. 143 (2008), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1293722
  4. 4.
    Mulyar, N.A., Schonenberg, M.H., Mans, R.S., Russell, N.C., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Towards a taxonomy of process flexibility (extended version). BPM Center Report No. BPM-07-11, Brisbane/Eindhoven (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luckham, D.: The Power of Events: An Introduction to Complex Event Processing in Distributed Enterprise Systems. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ammon, R.v., Emmersberger, C., Springer, F., Wolff, C.: Event-Driven Business Process Management and its Practical Application Taking the Example of DHL. In: Future Internet Symposium, Vienna (2008), http://icep-fis08.fzi.de/papers/iCEP08_8.pdf
  7. 7.
    Ammon, R.v., Emmersberger, C., Springer, F.: Event-Driven Business Process Management- Eine neue Technologie und erste Projekte am Beispiel der DHL. OBJEKTSpektrum (June 2008), http://www.sigs.de/publications/os/2008/06/
  8. 8.
    Ammon, R.v.: Event-Driven Business Process Management. In: Liu, L., Özsu, M.T. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Database Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ammon, R.v., Silberbauer, C., Wolff, C.: Domain Specific Reference Models for Event Patterns – for Faster Developing of Business Activity Monitoring Applications. In: VIPSI 2007, Lake Bled, Slovenia, October 8-11 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Albek, E., Bax, E., Billock, G., Chandy, K.M., Swett, I.: An Event Processing Language (EPL) for Building Sense and Respond Applications. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE international Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (Ipdps 2005) - Workshop 2, IPDPS, April 04 - 08, vol. 03. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brandl, H.-M., Guschakowski, D.: Complex Event Processing in the context of Business Activity Monitoring. An evaluation of different approaches and tools taking the example of the Next Generation easyCredit. Diploma thesis, Preworkshop DEBS 2007 (2007), http://www.citt-online.de/downloads/Diplomarbeit_BaGu_Final.pdf
  12. 12.
    Networked European Software & Services Initiative, NESSI Brochure (2005), http://www.nessi-europe.eu/Nessi/Portals/0/Nessi-Repository/Publications/Flyers/2005_09_NESSI_Brochure.pdf (Retrieved February 15, 2009)
  13. 13.
    Corte, P., Desideri, D.: NEXOF RA, Definition of an architectural framework & principles (2008), http://www.nexof-ra.eu/sites/default/files/D7.2_Definition_of_an_architectural_framework___principles.doc (Retrieved February 24, 2009)
  14. 14.
    NEXOF RA, NEXOF Reference Architecture (2008), http://www.nexof-ra.eu/?q=node/1 (Retrieved February 23, 2009)
  15. 15.
    Ammon, R.v., Emmersberger, C., Ertlmaier, T., Etzion, O., Paulus, T., Springer, F.: Existing and Future Standards for Event-Driven Business Process Management. In: DEBS 2009, Nashville (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heinl, P., Horn, S., Jablonski, S., Neeb, J., Stein, K., Teschke, M.: A comprehensive approach to flexibility in workflow management systems. In: WACC 1999: Proceedings of the international joint conference on Work activities coordination and collaboration, pp. 79–88. ACM, New York (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Regev, G., Wegmann, A.: A regulation-based view on business process and supporting system flexibility. In: Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Design and Support (BPMDS 2005), Proceedings of CAiSE 2005 Workshops, Porto, pp. 35–42 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reijers, H.A.: Workflow flexibility: The forlorn promise. In: 15th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE 2006), pp. 271–272. IEEE Computer Society, Manchester (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Daoudi, F., Nurcan, S.: A benchmarking framework for methods to design flexible business processes. Software Process Improvement and Practice, Trier 12, 51–63 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Snowdon, R.A., Warboys, B.C., Greenwood, R.M., Holland, C.P., Kawalek, J.P., Shaw, D.R.: On the architecture and form of flexible process support. Software Process Improvement and Practice, Trier 12, 21–34 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Regev, G., Bider, I., Wegmann, A.: Defining business process flexibility with the help of invariants. Software Process Improvement and Practice, Trier 12, 65–79 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Regev, G., Soffer, P., Schmidt, R.: Taxonomy of flexibility in business processes. In: Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development and Support (BPMDS 2006), Luxembourg (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Regev, G., Wegmann, A.: Business process flexibility: Weick’s organizational theory to the rescue. In: Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development and Support (BPMDS 2006), Luxembourg (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bider, I.: Masking flexibility behind rigidity: Notes on how much flexibility people are willing to cope with. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE 2005 Workshop, Porto, pp. 7–18 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soffer, P.: On the Notion of Flexibility in Business Processes. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE 2005 Workshop, Porto, pp. 35–42 (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
    Kazhamiakin, R.: Adaptation and Monitoring in S-Cube: Global Vision and Roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Mona+ Workshop, ServiceWave 2008, Madrid, pp. 67–76 (2008), http://www.s-cube-network.eu/news/s-cube-mona-proceedings-published
  28. 28.
    Ammon, R.v., Etzion, O., Paschke, A., Stojanovic, N.: Event-Driven Business Process Management. In: ED-BPM Workshop, ServiceWave 2008, Madrid (2008), http://www.nessi-europe.com/Nessi/AdminP/ArchivedPages/ServiceWave2008WorkshopBPM/tabid/468/Default.aspx (Retrieved September 20, 2009)
  29. 29.
    1st European Conference on Software Services and SOKU technologies, http://www.eu-ecss.eu/contents/conference/exhibitors-ssoku09/view
  30. 30.
    Liu, D., Pedrinaci, C., Domingue, J.: Semantic Enabled Complex Event Language for Business Process Monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 4th SBMN-Workshop, collocated with ESWC 2009, Crete, Greece, May 31 - June 4 (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ammon, R.v., et al.: 1st European Conference on Software Services and SOKU technologies, SSOKU 2009, Brussels (2009), http://www.citt-online.de/downloads/Flyer_SSOKU_BankingFraud.ppt
  32. 32.
    Widder, A., Ammon, R.v., Schaeffer, P., Wolff, C.: Identification of suspicious, unknown event patterns in an event cloud. In: Proceedings of the DEBS 2007, Rome. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 233 (2007)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Widder, A., Ammon, R.v., Hagemann, G., Schönefeld, D.: An Approach for Automatic Fraud Detection in the Insurance Domain. In: AAAI 2009 Spring Symposia / Intelligent Event Processing, Stanford, March 23-25 (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Paulus, T., Zacharias, R., Scheider, H., Wolff, C.: Fraud Management and Notification Event Architecture for Retail (NEAR) Standard and First Experiences with Point of Sales/Point of Services at Wincor Nixdorf. In: Service Wave 2008, Madrid (2008)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Paulus, T.: Tutorial on Event Processing Use Cases, ED-BPM in the Retail Domain - Taking the Example of Fraud Management. In: 3rd ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems 2009, Nashville (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    OMG, Business Process Management Initiative, http://www.bpmn.org
  37. 37.
    Allweyer, T.: BPMN – Business Process Modeling Notation. Einführung in den Standard für die Geschäftsprozessmodellierung. Books on Demand GmbH (2009) ISBN 978-3-8370-7004-0Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Decker, G., Grosskopf, A., Barros, A.: A Graphical Notation for Modeling Complex Events in Business Processes. In: 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2007, Annapolis, October 15-19, p. 27 (2007)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Object Management Group, Event Metamodel and Profile (EMP) Request For Proposal (2008), http://doc.omg.org/ad/2008-9-15 (Retrieved February 24, 2009)
  40. 40.
    Fleischmann, A.: Distributed Systems – Software Design and Implementation. Springer, Berlin (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schmidt, W., Fleischmann, A., Gilbert, O.: Subjektorientiertes Geschäftsprozessmanage-ment. Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik, HMD, Heft 299, p. 52. dpunkt.verlag, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    2nd ED-BPM Workshop at the Service Wave 2009, November 24-27, Stockholm (2009), http://www.icsoc.org/
  43. 43.
    Gartner, S.J.: Getting Painted in a Corner by Structured Business Processes (2009), http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2009/08/06/getting-painted-in-a-corner-by-structured-business-processes/ (Retrieved September 20, 2009)
  44. 44.
    OASIS, Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WSBPEL) Technical Committee, http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel
  45. 45.
    OASIS, WS-BPEL Extension for People (BPEL4People) Technical Committee, http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=bpel4people
  46. 46.
    Decker, G., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Pfitzner, K., Weske, M.: Modeling Service Choreographies using BPMN and BPEL4Chor. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 79–93. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, Berlin (2007) ISBN 978-3540735212Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Barros, A., Decker, G., Dumas, M.: Multi-staged and Multi-viewpoint Service Choreography Modeling. Technical Report 4668, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia (2006)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    XPDL Support and Resources, http://www.wfmc.org/xpdl.html
  50. 50.
    Abelson, H., Sussman, G., Sussman, J.: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, 2nd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    OASIS, Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0, Committee Draft (January 25, 2007) http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/ (Retrieved February 14, 2009)
  52. 52.
    OASIS, Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0 Primer (May 9, 2007) http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/Primer/wsbpel-v2.0-Primer.pdf (Retrieved February 14, 2009)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rainer von Ammon
    • 1
  • Thomas Ertlmaier
    • 1
  • Opher Etzion
    • 2
  • Alexander Kofman
    • 2
  • Thomas Paulus
    • 1
  1. 1.CITT GmbHRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.IBM HRLHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations