Semi-automated BP Integration in Virtual Organizations

  • Katarzyna Adamiak
  • Hodjat Soleimani MalekanEmail author
  • Hamideh Afsarmanesh
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 480)


Organizations frequently form various types of partnerships, of which one form is the virtual organization (VO). In VOs, members share part of their capabilities and capacities to seize bigger market opportunities. For effective collaboration however, also sharing knowledge and details about their business processes (BPs) and services is required. If achieved, VO can act as a large and more capable organization, with a repository/pool of services. But to mimic large organizations, VOs need to both drop less optimized overlapping services from this repository and integrate similar services. Our stepwise semi-automated methodology facilitates creating a most optimized pool of BPs with clean and valid integrated processes/services for the VO. A chain of software tools is also introduced in the methodology next to some partially manual steps. The presented solution is applied and evaluated in a real construction industry.


Virtual organizations Business process integration 


  1. 1.
    Afsarmanesh, H., Camarinha-Matos, L.: A framework for management of virtual organization breeding environments. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Ortiz, A. (eds.) Collaborative Networks and Their Breeding Environments. IFIP, vol. 186, pp. 35–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P.: A systematic review of systematic review process research in software engineering. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(12), 2049–2075 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design Science Research In Information Systems, pp. 9–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Malekan, H.S., Afsarmanesh, H.: Overview of business process modeling languages supporting enterprise collaboration. In: Shishkov, B. (ed.) BMSD 2013. LNBIP, vol. 173, pp. 24–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chrobak, P.: Overview of business process modelling software. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu 205, 84–93 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., Van Dongen, B., Käärik, R., Mendling, J.: Similarity of business process models: metrics and evaluation. Inf. Syst. 36(2), 498–516 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pollach, I.: Software Review: WordStat 5.0. Organizational Research Methods (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dijkman, R.: A classification of differences between similar business processes. In: 11th IEEE International on Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2007, p. 37. IEEE, October 2007Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gottschalk, F.: Configurable process models. Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Uba, R., Dijkman, R.: Merging business process models. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T.S., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6426, pp. 96–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sirageldin, A., Selamat, A., Ibrahim, R.: Graph-based simulated annealing and support vector machine in Malware detection. In: 2011 5th Malaysian Conference in Software Engineering (MySEC), pp. 361–364. IEEE, December 2011Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katarzyna Adamiak
    • 1
  • Hodjat Soleimani Malekan
    • 2
    Email author
  • Hamideh Afsarmanesh
    • 2
  1. 1.AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Informatics InstituteUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations