Advertisement

An Enhanced Communication Concept

  • Felix KossakEmail author
  • Christa Illibauer
  • Verena Geist
  • Christine Natschläger
  • Thomas Ziebermayr
  • Bernhard Freudenthaler
  • Theodorich Kopetzky
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we propose a generalised event concept for business process modelling which can increase flexibility for users in matters of communication, but also increases the number of different communication patterns for cross-organisation communication. We propose a combination of event trigger properties and different types of event pools. By means of event trigger properties, the classification into trigger types like “message”, “signal”, “error”, etc. is generalised to allow for a vast range of derived types. Event pools allow for flexible processing of events, like choosing the order in which mails are read and reacted to, and having different types of event pools further increases the number of possible communication patterns. Different pool types include private, group, and public event pools. The latter can be subscribed to and allow for broadcast and many-to-many communication. Virtual pools, including “inboxes” and “outboxes”, facilitate the practical handling of a number of different pools from the viewpoint of an agent (or activity node).

Keywords

Business Process Event Trigger Order Number Ground Model Process Engine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aldred, L.: Process integration. In: ter Hofstede, A.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Adams, M., Russell, N. (eds.) Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and its Support Environment, pp. 489–511. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barros, A., Decker, G., Grosskopf, A.: Complex events in business processes. In: Business Information Systems, pp. 29–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung: Zukunftsprojekt Industrie 4.0. http://www.bmbf.de/de/9072.php. Accessed 30 Sept 2015
  4. 4.
    Decker, G., Mendling, J.: Process instantiation. Data Knowl. Eng. 68(9), 777–792 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Etzion, O., Niblett, P.: Event Processing in Action. Manning Publications, Greenwich (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferreira, J., Wu, Q., Malkowski, S., Pu, C.: Towards flexible event-handling in workflows through data states. In: SERVICES-1, pp. 344–351. IEEE, New Jersey (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Obermeier, S., Börger, E.: Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hermosillo, G., Seinturier, L., Duchien, L.: Using complex event processing for dynamic business process adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, pp. 466–473. IEEE, New Jersey (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herzberg, N., Meyer, A., Weske, M.: An event processing platform for business process management. In: Proceedings of the 2013 17th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, pp. 107–116. IEEE, New Jersey (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    International Controller Association (ICV): Industrie 4.0—Controlling in the Age of Intelligent Networks (2015), http://www.icv-controlling.com/fileadmin/Assets/Content/AK/Ideenwerkstatt/Files/Dream_Car_Industrie_4.0_EN.pdf, Accessed 23 Dec 2015
  11. 11.
    Kossak, F., Geist, V.: An enhanced communication concept for business processes. In: Kolb, J., Leopold, H., Mendling, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures—EMISA 2015. Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol. 248, pp. 77–91. Gesellschaft für Informatik (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kossak, F., Illibauer, C., Geist, V., Kubovy, J., Natschläger, C., Ziebermayr, T., Kopetzky, T., Freudenthaler, B., Schewe, K.D.: A rigorous semantics for BPMN 2.0 process diagrams: The ground model in detail. http://www.scch.at/en/HagenbergBPM (2014). Accessed 12 Oct 2015
  13. 13.
    Kossak, F., Illibauer, C., Geist, V., Kubovy, J., Natschläger, C., Ziebermayr, T., Kopetzky, T., Freudenthaler, B., Schewe, K.D.: A Rigorous Semantics for BPMN 2.0 Process Diagrams. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Linden, I., Derbali, M., Schwanen, G., Jacquet, J., Ramdoyal, R., Ponsard, C.: Supporting business process exception management by dynamically building processes using the BEM framework. In: Decision Support Systems III, LNBIP, vol. 184, pp. 67–78. Springer International Publishing, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lucchi, R., Mazzara, M.: A pi-calculus based semantics for WS-BPEL. J. Logic Algebraic Program. 70(1), 96–118 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luckham, D.: The Power of Events: An Introduction to Complex Event Processing in Distributed Enterprise Systems. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mendling, J., Neumann, G., Nüttgens, M.: Yet another event-driven process chain. In: Business Process Management, pp. 428–433. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Monostori, L.: Cyber-physical production systems: roots, expectations and R&D challenges. Procedia CIRP 17, 9–13 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    OASIS: Web services business process execution language version 2.0. http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.html (2007). Accessed 12 Oct 2015
  20. 20.
    Object Management Group: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) 2.0. http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0 (2011). Accessed 6 Oct 2015
  21. 21.
    van der Aalst, W.M., ter Hofstede, A.H.: Workflow patterns homepage. http://www.workflowpatterns.com. Accessed 25 Sept 2015
  22. 22.
    von Ammon, R., Emmersberger, C., Ertlmaier, T., Etzion, O., Paulus, T., Springer, F.: Existing and future standards for event-driven business process management. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems, pp. 24:1–24:5. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Felix Kossak
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christa Illibauer
    • 1
  • Verena Geist
    • 1
  • Christine Natschläger
    • 1
  • Thomas Ziebermayr
    • 1
  • Bernhard Freudenthaler
    • 1
  • Theodorich Kopetzky
    • 1
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Competence Center Hagenberg GmbHHagenberg im MühlkreisAustria

Personalised recommendations