Advertisement

Modelling the Process of Process Execution: A Process Model-Driven Approach to Customising User Interfaces for Business Process Support Systems

  • Udo Kannengiesser
  • Richard Heininger
  • Tobias Gründer
  • Stefan Schedl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 248)

Abstract

This paper presents a process-driven approach for developing the user interfaces (UIs) of business process execution frontends. It allows customising the UIs to the needs of individual users and processes. The approach is based on viewing UI behaviour as a process that can be modelled and executed in the same way as the core process: as a sequence of steps, each of which is associated with a business object that describes the UI content in terms of the information displayed to the user. As both the UI process and the core process are run on the same business process engine, the two processes can interact smoothly using existing backend functionalities. The approach is demonstrated using a manufacturing scenario where shopfloor workers are provided with simple UIs on mobile devices to support the execution of a production process.

Keywords

Model-driven design Customised user interfaces Business process support systems Subject-oriented Business Process Management (S-BPM) 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research leading to these results has received funding from the EU Seventh Framework Programme FP7-2013-NMP-ICT-FOF(RTD) under grant agreement no 609190 (www.so-pc-pro.eu).

References

  1. 1.
    Börger, E., Stärk, R.: Abstract State Machines: A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer, Berlin (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: DEMO: towards a discipline of organisation engineering. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 128(2), 351–363 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dubé, D., Beard, J., Vangheluwe, H.: Rapid development of scoped user interfaces. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI International 2009, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5610, pp. 816–825. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fleischmann, A., Kannengiesser, U., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: Subject-oriented modeling and execution of multi-agent business processes. In: 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence (WI) and Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT), pp. 138–145, Atlanta, GA (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: S-BPM in the Wild: Practical Value Creation. Springer, Berlin (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Obermeier, S., Börger, E.: Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating sequential processes. Commun. ACM 21(8), 666–677 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kolb, J., Hübner, P., Reichert, M.: Automatically generating and updating user interface components in process-aware information systems. In: Meersman, R., et al. (eds.) OTM 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7565, pp. 444–454. Springer, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: A modeling paradigm for integrating processes and data at the micro level. In: Halpin, T., Nurcan, S., Krogstie, J., Soffer, P., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Bider, I. (eds.) BPMDS 2011 and EMMSAD 2011. LNBIP, vol. 81, pp. 201–215. Springer, Berlin (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lewin, K.: Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers. Harper & Brothers, New York (1951)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J.: Comparing task models for user interface design. In: The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 135–154. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: The Pi-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ould, M.A.: Business Processes: Modelling and Analysis for Re-Engineering and Improvement. Wiley, Chichester (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parnas, D.L.: On the use of transition diagrams in the design of a user interface for an inter-active computer system. In: ACM/CSC-ER, pp. 379–385. ACM Press, New York (1969)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Paternó, F.: Towards a UML for interactive systems. In: Nigay, L., Little, M. (eds.) EHCI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2254, pp. 7–18. Springer, Berlin (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pinheiro da Silva, P., Paton, N.W.: User interface modelling with UML. Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases XII, pp. 203–217. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schobel, J., Schickler, M., Pryss, R., Reichert, M.: Process-driven data collection with smart mobile devices. In: Monfort, V., Krempels, K.-H. (eds.) WEBIST 2014. LNBIP, vol. 226, pp. 347–362. Springer, Switzerland (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sinur, J., Odell, J., Fingar, P.: Business Process Management: The Next Wave. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Trætteberg, H.: Dialog modelling with interactors and UML statecharts - a hybrid approach. In: Jorge, J.A., Jardim Nunes, N., Falcao e Cunha, J. (eds.) DSV-IS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2844, pp. 346–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Trætteberg, H., Krogstie, J.: Enhancing the usability of BPM-solutions by combining process and user-interface modelling. In: Stirna, J., Persson, A. (eds.) PoEM 2008. LNBIP, vol. 15, pp. 86–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Welie, M., van der Veer, G.C., Eliëns, A.: An ontology for task world models. In: Markopoulos, P., Johnson, P. (eds.) Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems 1998. Eurographics, pp. 57–70. Springer, Vienna (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Udo Kannengiesser
    • 1
  • Richard Heininger
    • 1
  • Tobias Gründer
    • 1
  • Stefan Schedl
    • 1
  1. 1.Metasonic GmbHPfaffenhofenGermany

Personalised recommendations