Using Semantically Annotated Models for Supporting Business Process Benchmarking

  • Hans-Georg Fill
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 90)

Abstract

In this paper we describe an approach for using semantic annotations of process models to support business process benchmarking. We show how semantic annotations can support the preparation of process benchmarking data by adding machine-processable semantic information to existing process models without modifying the original modeling language, conduct semantic analyses for the purpose of performance measurement, and obfuscate the information contained in the models for ensuring confidentiality. The approach has been implemented on the ADOxx platform and applied to two use cases for a first evaluation.

Keywords

Semantic Annotation Benchmarking Performance Evaluation Ontologies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Camp, R.: Business Process Benchmarking: Finding and Implementing Best Practices. ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andersen, B.: Benchmarking. In: Rolstadas, A. (ed.) Performance Management - A Business Process Benchmarking Approach, pp. 211–242. Chapman and Hall, London (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amaral, P., Sousa, R.: Barriers to internal benchmarking initiatives: An empirical investigation. Benchmarking: An International Journal 16(4), 523–542 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karagiannis, D., Woitsch, R.: The PROMOTE approach: Modelling Knowledge Management Processes to describe an organisational KMS. In: ECAI Workshop, Lyon, France, INRIA (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hill, J.: Highlights From the Business Process Improvement Track at Symposium/ITxpo, Gartner Research (2010), http://www.gartner.com
  6. 6.
    Legner, C., Oesterle, H.: Process benchmarking - A methodological approach for process development using standard software (in German). In: 4th International Conference on Business Informatics, Physica, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    List, B., Korherr, B.: An Evaluation of Conceptual Business Process Modelling Languages. In: SAC 2006. ACM, Dijon (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hinton, M., Francis, G., Holloway, J.: Best practice benchmarking in the UK. Benchmarking: An International Journal 7(1), 52–58 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Juan, Y., Ou-Yang, C.: A Process Logic Comparison Approach to Support Business Process Benchmarking. Int. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies 26, 191–210 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heinrich, R., Paech, B.: Defining the Quality of Business Processes. In: Modellierung 2010, pp. 133–148. GI LNI, Klagenfurt (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karagiannis, D., Kühn, H.: Metamodelling platforms. In: Bauknecht, K., Tjoa, A.M., Quirchmayr, G. (eds.) EC-Web 2002. LNCS, vol. 2455, p. 182. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Celino, I., De Medeiros, A., Zeissler, G., Oppitz, M., Facca, F., Zoeller, S.: Semantic business processes analysis. In: Hepp, M., Hinkelmann, K., Karagiannis, D., Klein, R., Stojanovic, N. (eds.) SBPM 2007 Workshop, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 251 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual Modeling and Telos. In: Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. (eds.) Conceptual Modelling, Databases and CASE: An Integrated View of Information Systems Development, pp. 49–68. Wiley, Chichester (1992)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: Part A. BPM Journal 12(2), 249–254 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cardoso, J., Mendling, J., Neumann, G., Reijers, H.A.: A discourse on complexity of process models. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 117–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Becker, J., Breuker, D., Pfeiffer, D., Raeckers, M.: Constructing comparable business process models with domain specific languages - an empirical evaluation. In: ECIS 2009, Verona, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peleg, M., Tu, S.: Design Patterns for Clinical Guidelines. AI in Medicine 47(1), 1–24 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schuette, R., Rotthowe, T.: The Guidelines of Modeling - An Approach to Enhance the Quality in Information Models. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 240–254. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Herwig, S., Lis, L., Stein, A.: Towards Increased Comparability of Conceptual Models - Enforcing Naming Conventions through Domain Thesauri and Linguistic Grammars. In: ECIS 2009, Verona, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thomas, O., Fellmann, M.: Semantic Business Process Management: Ontology-based Process Modeling Using Event-Driven Process Chains. IBIS 2(1), 29–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stein, S., Stamber, C., El Kharbili, M.: ARIS for Semantic Business Process Management. In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 17, pp. 498–509. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Born, M., Hoffmann, J., Kaczmarek, T., Kowalkiewicz, M., Markovic, I., Scicluna, J., Weber, I., Zhou, X.: Semantic Annotation and Composition of Business Processes with Maestro. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 772–776. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ehrig, M., Koschmider, A., Oberweis, A.: Measuring Similarity between Semantic Business Process Models. In: Roddick, J., Hinze, A. (eds.) APCCM 2007, vol. 67, pp. 71–80. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    W3C: Owl web ontology language - overview w3c recommendation (February 10, 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ (accessed September 16, 2005)
  25. 25.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(1), 7–26 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fill, H.G.: UML Statechart Diagrams on the ADONIS Metamodeling Platform. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 127(1), 27–36 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Governatori, G., Hoffmann, J., Sadiq, S., Weber, I.: Detecting Regulatory Compliance for Business Process Models through Semantic Annotations. In: 4th Business Process Design Workshop. Springer, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    El Kharbili, M., Stein, S., Markovic, I., Pulvermueller, E.: Towards a Framework for Semantic Business Process Compliance Management. In: GRCIS 2008 Workshop (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Oppitz, M., Zeissler, G., Zoeller, S., Carenini, A.: Semantic Reverse Business Engineering - Public Deliverable 5.7 of Project IST 026850 SUPER (2009), http://www.ip-super.org/res/Deliverables/M36/D5.7.pdf (accessed March 15, 2011)
  30. 30.
    Hoefferer, P.: Achieving Business Process Model Interoperability Using Metamodels and Ontologies. In: Oesterle, H., Schelp, J., Winter, R. (eds.) ECIS 2007, pp. 1620–1631. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dimitrov, M., Simov, A., Momtchev, V., Konstantinov, M.: WSMO Studio – A Semantic Web Services Modelling Environment for WSMO. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 749–758. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wetzstein, B., Karastoyanova, D., Leymann, F.: Towards Management of SLA-Aware Business Processes Based on Key Performance Indicators. In: 9th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pedrinaci, C., Domingue, J., Alves de Medeiros, A.K.: A core ontology for business process analysis. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 49–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jenz & Partner: The Open Source Business Management Ontology (BMO) (2006), http://www.bpiresearch.com/Resources/RE_OSSOnt/re_ossont.htm (accessed June 13, 2006)
  35. 35.
    Markovic, I., Pereira, A.C.: Towards a formal framework for reuse in business process modeling. In: ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Benatallah, B., Paik, H.-Y. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2007. LNCS, vol. 4928, pp. 484–495. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Karagiannis, D., Ronaghi, F., Fill, H.G.: Business-oriented IT management: developing e-business applications with E-BPMS. In: ICEC 2008, vol. 258, pp. 97–100. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans-Georg Fill
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford University BMIR / University of Vienna DKEStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations