Advertisement

A Framework for Reasonable Support of Process Compliance Management

  • Michael Seitz
  • Stefan Schönig
  • Stefan Jablonski
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 183)

Abstract

Nearly every process must be compliant with rules and regulations, e.g. maturity levels, contracts or laws. Compliance can be supported by design, i.e. enforcing rules whilst process execution, or by after-the-fact detection, i.e. checks on process logs. We present a framework for the identification of reasonable support of process compliance management. By using a generic definition of the spectrum of process support, supportive tools are classified. Compliance management is assessed by COBIT information criteria. The degree of process support is then adapted according to the identified weaknesses. The framework is illustrated by means of an incident management process.

Keywords

Compliance Process support Business IT alignment 

References

  1. 1.
    El Kharbili, M., et al.: Towards a framework for semantic business process compliance management. In: Sadiq, S., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International WS on Governance, Risk and Compliance - Applications in Information Systems (GRCIS’08), Montpellier, pp. 1–15 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bace, J., et al.: Understanding the Costs of Compliance (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    IT Governance Institute: COBIT 4.1 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Object Management Group (OMG): Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM), Version 1.0 (2008). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMM/1.0/. Accessed 17 Mar 2013
  5. 5.
    Seitz, M., Jablonski, S.: Analysis on the value of process support implementations for quality management. In: Shishkov, B. (ed.) Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design, pp. 177–186 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jablonski, S.: MOBILE: a modular workflow model and architecture. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Working Conference on Dynamic Modeling and Information Systems (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seitz, M., Jablonski, S.: Evolutionary process engineering: case study for adequate process support. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Business Intelligence and Technology (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schönig, S., Zeising, M., Jablonski, S.: Comprehensive business process management through observation and navigation. In: 6th IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference PoEM 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seitz, M., Jablonski, S.: Evolutionäres Prozess-Engineering: Zum angemessenen Grad an Prozessunterstützung. In: Ingenhoff, D., Meier, A. (eds.) HMD - Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik. Social Media. dpunkt Verl., Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sackmann, S., Kähmer, M.: ExPDT: Ein Policy-Basierter Ansatz zur Automatisierung von Compliance. Wirtschaftsinformatik 50, 366–374 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karagiannis, D.: A business process-based modelling extension for regulatory compliance. In: Bichler, M. (ed.) Multikonf. Wirtschaftsinformatik 2008, pp. 1159–1173. GITO-Verlag, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Accorsi, R: Automated privacy audits to complement the notion of control for identity management. In: Leeuw, E., et al. (eds.) Policies and Research in Identity Management, pp. 39−48. Springer, US (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sadiq, W., Governatori, G., Namiri, K.: Modeling control objectives for business process compliance. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, K.: Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering. University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li, W., et al.: Semiotically inspired integrated clinical pathway management. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jablonski, S.: Do we really know how to support processes? considerations and reconstruction. In: Engels, G., Lewerentz, C., Schäfer, W., Schürr, A., Westfechtel, B. (eds.) Nagl Festschrift. LNCS, vol. 5765, pp. 393–410. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schönig, S., et al.: Process observation as support for evolutionary process engineering. Int. J. Adv. Syst. Meas. 5, 188–202 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Faerber, M.: Prozessorientiertes Qualitätsmanagement. Ein Konzept zur Implementierung. Univ., Diss.–Bayreuth, Gabler, Wiesbaden (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Seitz
    • 1
  • Stefan Schönig
    • 2
  • Stefan Jablonski
    • 2
  1. 1.PRODATO Integration Technology GmbHErlangenGermany
  2. 2.University of Bayreuth, Chair of Applied Computer Science IVBayreuthGermany

Personalised recommendations