An Artifact-Centric Approach to Dynamic Modification of Workflow Execution
Being able to quickly respond to change is critical to any organizations to stay competitive in the marketplace. It is widely acknowledged that it is a necessity to provide flexibility in the process model to handle changes at both model level as well as instance level. Motivated by a business policy rich and highly dynamic business process in the real estate administration in China, we develop a dynamically modifiable workflow model. The model is based on the artifact-centric design principle as opposed to the traditional process-centric approach. Runtime execution variations can be specified as execution modification rules, which lead to deviations to the normal executions. With the support of rules and declarative constructs such as retract, skip, add, and replace, ad-hoc changes can be applied to execution at anytime depending on the runtime data and the instance status gathered through the use of artifacts in our model.
KeywordsBusiness Process Manage Business Process Execution Path Business Process Modeling Dynamic Schema
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Athena, P.: Flower user manual. Technical report, Pallas Athena BV, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands (2002)Google Scholar
- 3.Balko, S., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Barros, A.P., La Rosa, M.: Controlled flexibility and lifecycle management of business processes through extensibility. In: EMISA 2009, pp. 97–110 (2009)Google Scholar
- 5.Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing business process variants in the process lifecycle. In: Proc. ICEIS (2008)Google Scholar
- 6.Hull, R., Damaggio, E., Fournier, F., Gupta, M., Heath III, F., Hobson, S., Linehan, M., Maradugu, S., Nigam, A., Sukaviriya, P., Vaculín, R.: Introducing the guard-stagemilestone approach to specifying business entity lifecycles. In: Proc. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM). Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
- 7.Kucukoguz, E., Su, J.: On lifecycle constraints of artifact-centric workflows. In: Proc. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods, WSFM (2010)Google Scholar
- 8.Liu, G., Liu, X., Qin, H., Su, J., Yan, Z., Zhang, L.: Automated realization of business workflow specification. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on SOA, Globalization, People, and Work (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts:an approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3) (2003)Google Scholar
- 10.Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Declare: Full support for looselystructured processes. In: EDOC 2007, pp. 287–300 (2007)Google Scholar
- 15.Schonenberg, H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process flexibility: A survey of contemporary approaches. In: CIAO! / EOMAS 2008, pp. 16–30 (2008)Google Scholar
- 17.van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: Decserflow: towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: International Conference on Web Service and Formal Methods (2006)Google Scholar
- 18.van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. CSRD 23, 99–113 (2009)Google Scholar
- 20.Weber, B., Sadiq, S.W., Reichert, M.: Beyond rigidity - dynamic process lifecycle support. Computer Science - R&D 23(2), 47–65 (2009)Google Scholar