A Novel Approach to Modeling Context-Aware and Social Collaboration Processes

  • Vitaliy Liptchinsky
  • Roman Khazankin
  • Hong-Linh Truong
  • Schahram Dustdar
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7328)


Companies strive to retain the knowledge about their business processes by modeling them. However, non-routine people-intensive processes, such as distributed collaboration, are hard to model due to their unpredictable nature. Often such processes involve advanced activities, such as discovery of socially coherent teams or unbiased experts, or complex coordination towards reaching a consensus. Modeling such activities requires an expressive formal representation of process context, i.e. related actors and artifacts. Existing modeling approaches do not provide the necessary level of expressiveness to capture it. We therefore propose a novel modeling approach and a graphical notation, demonstrate their applicability and expressivity via several use cases, and discuss their strengths and weaknesses.


Process Modeling Social Context Collaboration Visual Language 


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C., Wainer, J.: Workflow modeling using proclets. In: Scheuermann, P., Etzion, O. (eds.) CoopIS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1901, pp. 198–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Weske, M., Grnbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data & Knowledge Engineering 53(2), 129–162 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barthelmess, P., Wainer, J.: Workflow systems: a few definitions and a few suggestions. In: Proceedings of Conference on Organizational Computing Systems, COCS 1995, pp. 138–147. ACM, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhattacharya, K., Hull, R., Su, J.: A data-centric design methodology for business processes. In: Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, ch. 23, pp. 503–531 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Casati, F., Ceri, S., Pernici, B., Pozzi, G.: Conceptual Modeling of Workflows. In: Papazoglou, M.P. (ed.) ER 1995 and OOER 1995. LNCS, vol. 1021, pp. 341–354. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Consens, M.P., Mendelzon, A.O.: Graphlog: a visual formalism for real life recursion. In: Proceedings of the Ninth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 1990, pp. 404–416. ACM, New York (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    David Harel: Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming 8(3), 231–274 (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dickson, G.W., DeSanctis, G.: Information Technology and the Future Enterprise: New Models for Managers. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ellis, C.: Team automata for groupware systems. In: Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work: the Integration Challenge, GROUP 1997, pp. 415–424. ACM, New York (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Engels, G., Groenewegen, L.: Towards Team-Automata-Driven Object-Oriented Collaborative Work. In: Brauer, W., Ehrig, H., Karhumäki, J., Salomaa, A. (eds.) Formal and Natural Computing. LNCS, vol. 2300, pp. 247–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hagen, C., Alonso, G.: Beyond the black box: event-based inter-process communication in process support systems. In: Proceedings of 19th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 450–457 (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Latella, D., Majzik, I., Massink, M.: Towards a formal operational semantics of uml statechart diagrams. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC6/WG6.1 Third International Conference on Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems (FMOODS), p. 465. Kluwer, B.V. (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martinez-Moyano, I.: Exploring the dynamics of collaboration in interorganizational settings. In: Creating a Culture of Collaboration: The International Association of Facilitators Handbook 4, p. 69 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Data-Driven Modeling and Coordination of Large Process Structures. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 131–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neumann, J.V.: Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata. University of Illinois Press, Champaign (1966)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nurcan, S.: A survey on the flexibility requirements related to business processes and modeling artifacts. In: Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2008, pp. 378–388. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Powell, A., Piccoli, G., Ives, B.: Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research. SIGMIS Database 35, 6–36 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reiter, R.: On closed world data bases, pp. 300–310. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1987)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sanz, J.: Entity-centric operations modeling for business process management - a multidisciplinary review of the state-of-the-art. In: 2011 IEEE 6th International Symposium on Service Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), pp. 152–163 (December 2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wieland, M., Kopp, O., Nicklas, D., Leymann, F.: Towards context-aware workflows. In: CAISE 2007 Proceedings of the Workshops and Doctoral Consortium. Citeseer (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vitaliy Liptchinsky
    • 1
  • Roman Khazankin
    • 1
  • Hong-Linh Truong
    • 1
  • Schahram Dustdar
    • 1
  1. 1.Distributed Systems GroupVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations