Towards Location-Aware Declarative Business Process Management

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

Abstract

Business process modelling usually involves perspectives like the functional (what), the organizational (who), the data-based (consuming and producing which information) and the behavioural (when) perspective. However, the so-called “locational” perspective is either neglected or vaguely contained in one of the others. A locational perspective implies that locations are treated as “first-class” modelling entities like processes and data objects. The assignment of tasks to participants and the progression of a process may then depend on these locations. This contribution describes how such location aware processes may be modelled and how a process execution system can be extended in a way so that it interprets these processes.

Keywords

Business process execution Location awareness Geo information Process modelling 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The presented work is developed and used in the project “Kompetenzzentrum für praktisches Prozess- und Qualitätsmanagement” which is funded by “Europäischer Fonds für regionale Entwicklung (EFRE)”.

References

  1. 1.
    Mühlen, M., Ho, D.: Risk management in the BPM lifecycle. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 454–466. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zairi, M.: Business process management: a boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness. Bus. Process Manag. J. 3, 64–80 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Object Management Group Inc.: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0 (2011). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0
  4. 4.
    Van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pešić, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: balancing between flexibility and support. Comput. Sci. – Res. Dev. 23, 99–113 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andrews, T., Curbera, F., Dholakia, H., Goland, Y., Klein, J., Leymann, F., Liu, K., Roller, D., Smith, D., Thatte, S., Trickovic, I., Weerawarana, S.: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services - Version 1.1 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fahland, D., Lübke, D., Mendling, J., Reijers, H., Weber, B., Weidlich, M., Zugal, S.: Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability. In: halpin, terry, Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Ukor, R. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 353–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jablonski, S., Bußler, C.: Workflow Management: Modeling Concepts Architecture and Implementation. Thomson, London (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Igler, M., Faerber, M., Zeising, M., Jablonski, S.: Modeling and planning collaboration in process management systems using organizational constraints. In: 6th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2010), Chicago, IL, USA, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zeising, M., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Improving collaborative business process execution by traceability and expressiveness. In: 8th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom 2012), pp. 435–442 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shinde, S., Portier, B.: Geo-location improves business process management human task assignment. Academy TechNotes, vol. 3 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pešić, M., Schonenberg, H., Van der Aalst, W.M.P.: DECLARE: full support for loosely-structured processes. In: 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007), Annapolis, Maryland, USA, p. 287 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M., Sadiq, W.: Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Inf. Syst. 30, 349–378 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wainer, J., Bezerra, F.: Constraint-based flexible workflows. In: Favela, J., Decouchant, D. (eds.) Groupware: Design, Implementation and Use, pp. 151–158. Springer, Autrans, FR (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W3C: Geolocation API Specification (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OASIS: Web Services – Human Task (WS-HumanTask) Specification Version 1.1 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    National Imagery and Mapping Agency: Department of Defense World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schönig, S., Zeising, M., Jablonski, S.: Comprehensive business process management through observation and navigation. In: 6th IFIP WG 8.1 Working conference on PoEM 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gerke, K., Alexander C., Mendling, J.: Process mining of RFID-based supply chains. In: Commerce and Enterprise Computing, 2009, CEC’09. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    De Leoni, M., Adams, M., Van Der Aalst, W.M., Ter Hofstede, A.H.: Visual support for work assignment in process-aware information systems: framework formalisation and implementation. Decis. Support Systems 54(1), 345–361 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aoumeur, N., Fiadeiro, J., Oliveira, C. Towards an architectural approach to location-aware business process. In: Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, pp. 147–152 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Schönig
    • 1
  • Michael Zeising
    • 1
  • Stefan Jablonski
    • 1
  1. 1.Applied Computer Science IVUniversity of BayreuthBayreuthGermany

Personalised recommendations