Enhancing Modeling and Change Support for Process Families through Change Patterns

  • Clara Ayora
  • Victoria Torres
  • Barbara Weber
  • Manfred Reichert
  • Vicente Pelechano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 147)


The increasing adoption of process-aware information systems (PAISs), together with the variability of business processes (BPs), has resulted in large collections of related process model variants (i.e., process families). To effectively deal with process families, several proposals (e.g., C-EPC, Provop) exist that extend BP modeling languages with variability-specific constructs. While fostering reuse and reducing modeling efforts, respective constructs imply additional complexity and demand proper support for process designers when creating and modifying process families. Recently, generic and language independent adaptation patterns were successfully introduced for creating and evolving single BP models. However, they are not sufficient to cope with the specific needs for modeling and evolving process families. This paper suggests a complementary set of generic and language-independent change patterns specifically tailored to the needs of process families. When used in combination with existing adaptation patterns, change patterns for process families will enable the modeling and evolution of process families at a high-level of abstraction. Further, they will serve as reference for implementing tools or comparing proposals managing process families.


Process Variability Process Families Patterns Process Change 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Barros, B.: Workflow Patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1), 5–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aghakasiri, Z., Mirian-Hosseinabadi, S.H.: Workflow change patterns: Opportunities for extension and reuse. In: Proc. SERA 2009, pp. 265–275 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ayora, C., Torres, V., Reichert, M., Weber, B., Pelechano, V.: Towards run-time flexibility for process families: Open issues and research challenges. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM 2012 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 477–488. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ayora, C., Torres, V., Weber, B., Reichert, M., Pelechano, V.: Change patterns for process families. Technical Report, PROS-TR-2012-06,
  5. 5.
    Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: The ADEPT project: a decade of research and development for robust and flexible process support. Com. Sci. - R&D 23, 81–97 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dijkman, R., La Rosa, M., Reijers, H.A.: Managing large collections of business process models - Current techniques and challenges. Comp. in Ind. 63(2), 91–97 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Döhring, M., Zimmermann, B., Karg, L.: Flexible workflows at design- and runtime using BPMN2 adaptation patterns. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2011. LNBIP, vol. 87, pp. 25–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gottschalk, F.: Configurable process models. Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Contextual injection of quality measures into software engineering processes. Intl. J. Adv. in Software 4, 76–99 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gschwind, T., Koehler, J., Wong, J.: Applying patterns during business process modeling. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 4–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Günther, C.W., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Change mining in adaptive process management systems. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 309–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Context-based configuration of process variants. In: Proc. TCoB 2008, pp. 31–40 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: the Provop approach. J. of Software Maintenance 22(6-7), 519–546 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering, Technical Report EBSE/EPIC–2007–01 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kulkarni, V., Barat, S., Roychoudhury, S.: Towards business application product lines. In: France, R.B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds.) MODELS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7590, pp. 285–301. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Küster, J.M., Gerth, C., Förster, A., Engels, G.: Detecting and resolving process model differences in the absence of a change log. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 244–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Küster, J.M., Gerth, C., Engels, G.: Dynamic computation of change operations in version management of business process models. In: Kühne, T., Selic, B., Gervais, M.-P., Terrier, F. (eds.) ECMFA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6138, pp. 201–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lanz, A., Weber, B., Reichert, M.: Time patterns for process-aware information systems. Requirements Engineering, 1–29 (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    La Rosa, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-based variability modeling for system configuration. Software and System Modeling 8(2), 251–274 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lerner, B.S., Christov, S., Osterweil, L.J., Bendraou, R., Kannengiesser, U., Wise, A.: Exception Handling Patterns for Process Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 36(2), 162–183 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: Mining business process variants: Challenges, scenarios, algorithms. Data Knowledge & Engineering 70(5), 409–434 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marrella, A., Mecella, M., Russo, A.: Featuring automatic adaptivity through workflow enactment and planning. In: Proc. CollaborateCom 2011, pp. 372–381 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Müller, D., Herbst, J., Hammori, M., Reichert, M.: IT support for release management processes in the automotive industry. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 368–377. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling flexibility in process-aware information systems: challenges, methods, technologies. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reinhartz-Berger, I., Soffer, P., Sturm, A.: Organizational reference models: supporting an adequate design of local business processes. IBPIM 4(2), 134–149 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A configurable reference modeling language. Information Systems 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow data patterns. Technical Report FIT-TR-2004-01, Queensland Univ. of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow resource patterns. Technical Report WP 127, Eindhoven Univ. of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Workflow Exception Patterns. In: Martinez, F.H., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4001, pp. 288–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smirnov, S., Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Weske, M.: Object-sensitive action patterns in process model repositories. In: Muehlen, M.z., Su, J. (eds.) BPM 2010 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 66, pp. 251–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change patterns and change support features - Enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Knowledge & Engineering 66, 438–466 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weber, B., Sadiq, S., Reichert, M.: Beyond rigidity - dynamic process lifecycle support. Computer Science 23, 47–65 (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: Refactoring large process model repositories. Computers in Industry 62(5), 467–486 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clara Ayora
    • 1
  • Victoria Torres
    • 1
  • Barbara Weber
    • 2
  • Manfred Reichert
    • 3
  • Vicente Pelechano
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de ValènciaSpain
  2. 2.University of InnsbruckAustria
  3. 3.University of UlmGermany

Personalised recommendations