Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Representation Theory Versus Workflow Patterns – The Case of BPMN

  • Conference paper
Conceptual Modeling - ER 2006 (ER 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 4215))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Selecting an appropriate process modeling language forms an important task within business process management projects. A wide range of process modeling languages has been developed over the last decades, leading to an obvious need for rigorous theory to assist in the evaluation and comparison of the capabilities of these languages. While academic progress in the area of process modeling language evaluation has been made on at least two premises, Representation Theory and Workflow Patterns, it remains unclear how these frameworks relate to each other. We use a generic framework for language evaluation to establish similarities and differences between these acknowledged reference frameworks and discuss how and to what extent they complement respectively substitute each other. Our line of investigation follows the case of the popular BPMN modeling language, whose evaluation from the perspectives of Representation Theory and Workflow Patterns is reconciled in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Group, G.: Delivering ITś Contribution: The 2005 CIO Agenda. Gartner EXP Premier Reports January 2005, Gartner, Inc. (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Gallo, S.: How do Practitioners Use Conceptual Modeling in Practice? Data & Knowledge Engineering 58, 358–380 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. BPMI.org, OMG: Business Process Modeling Notation Specification. Final Adopted Specification (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Don’t Go with the Flow: Web Services Composition Standards Exposed. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18, 72–76 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Moody, D.L.: Theoretical and Practical Issues in Evaluating the Quality of Conceptual Models: Current State and Future Directions. Data & Knowledge Engineering 15, 243–276 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wand, Y., Weber, R.: An Ontological Model of an Information System. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 16, 1282–1292 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wand, Y., Weber, R.: On the Ontological Expressiveness of Information Systems Analysis and Design Grammars. Journal of Information Systems 3, 217–237 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wand, Y., Weber, R.: On the Deep Structure of Information Systems. Information Systems Journal 5, 203–223 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow Patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14, 5–51 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D.: Workflow Resource Patterns: Identification, Representation and Tool Support. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 216–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow Data Patterns: Identification, Representation and Tool Support. In: Delcambre, L.M.L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) ER 2005. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 353–368. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Rosemann, M., Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, P.: A Study of the Evolution of the Representational Capabilities of Process Modeling Grammars. In: Dubois, E., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4001, pp. 447–461. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Wohed, P., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Russell, N.: On the Suitability of BPMN for Business Process Modelling. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 161–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G., Sølvberg, A.: Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modeling. IEEE Software 11, 42–49 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.D.: Process Models Representing Knowledge for Action: a Revised Quality Framework. European Journal of Information Systems 15, 91–102 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wahl, T., Sindre, G.: An Analytical Evaluation of BPMN Using a Semiotic Quality Framework. In: Castro, J., Teniente, E. (eds.) CAiSE 2005, vol. 1, FEUP, Porto, Portugal, pp. 533–544 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nysetvold, A.G., Krogstie, J.: Assessing Business Process Modeling Languages Using a Generic Quality Framework. In: Castro, J., Teniente, E. (eds.) CAiSE 2005, vol. 1, FEUP, Porto, pp. 545–556 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Recker, J., Indulska, M., Rosemann, M., Green, P.: How Good is BPMN Really? Insights from Theory and Practice. In: Ljungberg, J., Andersson, M. (eds.) 14th European Conference on Information Systems, Goeteborg, Sweden (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Siau, K., Rossi, M.: Evaluation of Information Modeling Methods – A Review. In: Dolk, D. (ed.) 31st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, Hawaii, pp. 314–322. Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Recker, J.: Evaluation of Conceptual Modeling Languages. An Epistemological Discussion. In: Romano, N.C. (ed.) 11th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Omaha, Nebraska, pp. 329–337, Association for Information Systems (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Siau, K.: Informational and Computational Equivalence in Comparing Information Modeling Methods. Journal of Database Management 15, 73–86 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Floyd, C.: A Comparative Evaluation of System Development Methods. In: Olle, T.W., Sol, H.G., Verrijn-Stuart, A.A. (eds.) Information System Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice, pp. 19–54. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Weber, R.: Ontological Foundations of Information Systems. Coopers & Lybrand and the Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand, Melbourne, Australia (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Models. Telematica Instituut Fundamental Research Series, vol. 015, Telematica Instituut, Enschede, The Netherlands (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gurr, C.A.: Effective Diagrammatic Communication: Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Issues. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 10, 317–342 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bunge, M.A.: Treatise on Basic Philosophy. Ontology I - The Furniture of the World, vol. 3. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1977)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Manning, C.: Candidate Interoperability Standards: An Ontological Overlap Analysis. Technical report, University of Queensland (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wohed, P., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Analysis of Web Services Composition Languages: The Case of BPEL4WS. In: Song, I.-Y., Liddle, S.W., Ling, T.-W., Scheuermann, P. (eds.) ER 2003. LNCS, vol. 2813, pp. 200–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, 126 Margaret Street, Brisbane QLD, 4000, Australia

    Jan Recker & Michael Rosemann

  2. Stockholm University/The Royal Institute of Technology, Forum 100, 164 40, Kista, Sweden

    Petia Wohed

Authors
  1. Jan Recker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Petia Wohed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Rosemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science,  

    David W. Embley

  2. Universitat Politècnica Catalunya, Jordi Girona 1-3, 08034, Barcelona, Spain

    Antoni Olivé

  3. Department of MIS, Eller School of Management,, University of Arizona, 430J McClelland Hall, 85721, Tucson, AZ

    Sudha Ram

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Recker, J., Wohed, P., Rosemann, M. (2006). Representation Theory Versus Workflow Patterns – The Case of BPMN. In: Embley, D.W., Olivé, A., Ram, S. (eds) Conceptual Modeling - ER 2006. ER 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4215. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11901181_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11901181_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-47224-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47227-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation