Business operations include decisions having impact on their success and performance. The digital world provides access to massive amount of data being relevant in decision making. After a decision, often succeeding activities are not immediately started or preparation activities are conducted. Meanwhile new information could be received which lead to a different decision output. Considering this can save organizations process cost or flow time. In this paper, we provide a concept to realize the re-evaluation of decisions based on event processing. We integrated a re-evaluation scope in business processes in which change of decision is still accepted and which dynamically subscribes to those events leading to new decision output. The concept is evaluated by a proof-of concept implementation and a single-case experiment on a logistic use case. There, re-evaluation was relevant for almost a quarter of the transports reducing the traveling time.


BPMN DMN Re-evaluation Event processing 



We thank Heiko Beck for the helpful input and implementation.


  1. 1.
    Batoulis, K., Meyer, A., Bazhenova, E., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Extracting decision logic from process models. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 349–366. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19069-3_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bazhenova, E., Buelow, S., Weske, M.: Discovering decision models from event logs. In: Abramowicz, W., Alt, R., Franczyk, B. (eds.) BIS 2016. LNBIP, vol. 255, pp. 237–251. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-39426-8_19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bülow, S., Backmann, M., Herzberg, N., Hille, T., Meyer, A., Ulm, B., Wong, T.Y., Weske, M.: Monitoring of business processes with complex event processing. In: Lohmann, N., Song, M., Wohed, P. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNBIP, vol. 171, pp. 277–290. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-06257-0_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calvanese, D., Dumas, M., Laurson, Ü., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Teinemaa, I.: Semantics and analysis of dmn decision tables. arXiv preprint (2016). arXiv:1603.07466
  5. 5.
    Camunda: camunda BPM Platform.
  6. 6.
    Döhring, M., Karg, L., Godehardt, E., Zimmermann, B.: The convergence of workflows, business rules and complex events. In: 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 338–343 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    EsperTech: Esper Event Processing Language EPL.
  8. 8.
    Etzion, O., Niblett, P.: Event Processing in Action. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hermosillo, G., Seinturier, L., Duchien, L.: Creating context-adaptive business processes. In: Maglio, P.P., Weske, M., Yang, J., Fantinato, M. (eds.) ICSOC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6470, pp. 228–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-17358-5_16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herzberg, N., Meyer, A., Weske, M.: An event processing platform for business process management. In: EDOC. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knöpfel, A., Gröne, B., Tabeling, P.: Fundamental Modeling Concepts: Effective Communication of IT Systems. Wiley, San Francisco (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krumeich, J., Weis, B., Werth, D., Loos, P.: Event-driven business process management: where are we now? Bus. Process Manage. J. 20(4), 615–633 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li, J., Mirchandani, P.B., Borenstein, D.: The vehicle rescheduling problem: model and algorithms. Networks 50(3), 211–229 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), Version 2.0., January 2011Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG: Decision Model and Notation (DMN), Version 1.1., June 2016Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Patiniotakis, I., Papageorgiou, N., Verginadis, Y., Apostolou, D., Mentzas, G.: An aspect oriented approach for implementing situational driven adaptation of BPMN2.0 workflows. In: Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 414–425. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36285-9_44 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems: Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Verginadis, Y., Papageorgiou, N., Patiniotakis, I., Apostolou, D., Mentzas, G.: A goal driven dynamic event subscription approach. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems, pp. 81–84. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vieira, G.E., Herrmann, J.W., Lin, E.: Rescheduling manufacturing systems: a framework of strategies, policies, and methods. J. Sched. 6(1), 39–62 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weidlich, M., Ziekow, H., Mendling, J., Günther, O., Weske, M., Desai, N.: Event-based monitoring of process execution violations. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Toumani, F., Wolf, K. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6896, pp. 182–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23059-2_16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wieringa, R.J.: Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luise Pufahl
    • 1
  • Sankalita Mandal
    • 1
  • Kimon Batoulis
    • 1
  • Mathias Weske
    • 1
  1. 1.Hasso Plattner Institute at the University of PotsdamPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations