Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards Flexibility and Dynamic Coordination in Computer-Interpretable Enterprise Process Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Enterprise Interoperability V

Part of the book series: Proceedings of the I-ESA Conferences ((IESACONF,volume 5))

Abstract

We contribute to the understanding of collaboration in enterprise process models and adaptation to unforeseen variations thereof. To address the need for flexibility we take an example from the life-saving domain and translate qualitatively collected process data of a concrete medical intervention into a computer-interpretable guideline model. To overcome implementation barriers we apply the coordination modeling language Paradigm, as a possible approach, which addresses coordination of collaborating components in terms of dynamic constraints. Its component McPal enables adding new behavior, and, subsequently, gradually adapting the system without quiescence.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

References

  1. Pentland B. and Feldman M. 2008. Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information and Organization, 18(4):235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Reijers H.A. and Mendling J. 2011. A Study into the Factors that Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetic – Part A, 41(3): 449–461, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sonnenberg F.A., Hagerty C.G. Computer-interpretable clinical practice guidelines. Methods of Information in Medicine, 45(1):145–158, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Grando A., Peleg M. and Glasspool, D. A goal-oriented framework for specifying clinical guidelines and handling medical errors. J. of Biomedical Informatics, 43:287–299, April 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Peleg M. et al. Comparing computer-interpretable guideline models: a case-study approach. JAMIA, 10(1):52–68, January 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Isern D, and Moreno A. Computer-based execution of clinical guidelines: A review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 77(12):787–808, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shahar Y, Miksch S, and Johnson P. The asgaard project: a task-specific framework for the application and critiquing of time-oriented clinical guidelines. Artif Intell Med, 14(1-2):29–51, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Giordano L. et al. Model checking for clinical guidelines: an agent-based approach. Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium, pages 289–293, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Boxwala A, et al. Glif3: a representation format for sharable computer-interpretable clinical practice guidelines. J. of Biomedical Informatics, 37:147–161, June 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tu S.W, Campbell J, and Musen M.A. The sage guideline modeling: motivation and methodology. Stud Helath Technol Inform, (101):167–171, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Peleg M. and Tu S.W. Design patterns for clinical guidelines. Artif. Intell. Med., 47:1–24, September 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Shea S., DuMouchel W. and Bahamonde L. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized con- trolled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventative care in the ambulatory setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc, (3): pp. 399–409, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Küster J. Consistency Management of Object-Oriented Behavioral Models. PhD thesis, University of Paderborn, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fox J, Das S. Safe and Sound: Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Applications. AAAI Press, 1st edition, July 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Andova S, Groenewegen L.P.J, and de Vink E.P. Dynamic consistency in process algebra: From Paradigm to ACP. Science of Computer Programming, 76(8), pp. 711–735, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Andova S. et al. Adaptation on-the-fly. In G. Salaün and M. Sirjani, editors, Proc. FOCLASA 2009, Rhodes, pp. 23–44. ENTCS 255, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pentland B.T, Feldman M.S. Narrative Networks: Patterns of Technology and Organization. Organization Science September/October 2007 vol. 18 no. 5, 781–795

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pentland B.T, Rueter H. Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, pp. 484–510. 1994

    Google Scholar 

  19. Feldman M.S., Pentland, B.T., Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48, No. 1. (2003), pp. 94–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Becker M.C., Organizational routines: a review of the literature. ICC (2004) 13(4):643–678

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mulyar N. et al. Declarative and procedural approaches for modelling clinical guidelines: addressing flexibility issues. In Proceedings of BPM’07, pp. 335–346, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work has been partly funded by the EDAFMIS project in the framework of ITEA2. We would like to thank all EDAFMIS partners for their feedback and positive influence.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LIACS, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Christoph J. Stettina, Lucas P. J. Groenewegen & Bernhard R. Katzy

  2. CeTIM, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Christoph J. Stettina & Bernhard R. Katzy

Authors
  1. Christoph J. Stettina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lucas P. J. Groenewegen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernhard R. Katzy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph J. Stettina .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Research Centre on Production Management, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Pl. Ferrándiz Carbonell 2, Alcoy, 03801, Spain

    Raúl Poler

  2. , INTEROP-VLab, University Bordeaux 1, IMS Bât A4, cours de la liberation 351, Talence-cedex, 33405, France

    Guy Doumeingts

  3. Leiden University, Plantsoen 97, Leiden, 2311, Netherlands

    Bernhard Katzy

  4. , Dept. Lenguajes y Sistemas Informaticos, Universidad Jaume I, Av. Sos Banyos s/n, Castellon, 12071, Spain

    Ricardo Chalmeta

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Stettina, C.J., Groenewegen, L.P.J., Katzy, B.R. (2012). Towards Flexibility and Dynamic Coordination in Computer-Interpretable Enterprise Process Models. In: Poler, R., Doumeingts, G., Katzy, B., Chalmeta, R. (eds) Enterprise Interoperability V. Proceedings of the I-ESA Conferences, vol 5. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2819-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2819-9_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2818-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2819-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation