On the Performance of Workflow Processes with Distributed Actors: Does Place Matter?

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4714)


Current workflow technology offers rich features to manage and enact business processes. In principle, the technology enables actors to cooperate in the execution of business processes regardless of their geographical location. Furthermore, the technology is considered as an efficient means to reduce processing times. In this paper, we evaluate the effects on the performance of a workflow process in an organizational setting where actors are geographically distributed. The studied process is exceptional, because equivalent tasks can be performed at different locations. We have analyzed a large workflow process log with state-of-the art mining tools associated with the ProM framework. Our analysis leads to the conclusion that there is a positive effect on process performance when workflow actors are geographically close.


Workflow management performance evaluation process mining case study 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.M.: Workflow Management: Models, Methods, and Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Reijers, H.A., Song, M.: Discovering social networks from event logs. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 14(6), 549–593 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weijters, A.J.M.M., Maruster, L.: Workflow Mining: Discovering Process Models from Event Logs. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 16(9), 1128–1142 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allen, T.: Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within the R&D Organisation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1977)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barker, R.G.: Ecological psychology. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif (1968)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Becker, J., Vossen, G.: Geschaftsprozesmodellierung und Workflow-Management: Eine Einfuhring, chapter Geschaftsprozesmodellierung und Workflow-Management. Modelle, Methoden, Werkzeuge, Albany, pp. 17–26 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boutellier, R., Gassmann, O., Macho, H., Roux, M.: Management of Dispersed R&D Teams. R&D Management 28(1), 13–25 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carmel, E., Agarwal, R.: Tactical approaches for alleviating distance in global software development. Software, IEEE 18(2), 22–29 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davenport, T.H.: Process innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    van Dongen, B.F., de Medeiros, A.K.A., Verbeek, H.M.W., Weijters, A.J.M.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The ProM framework: A new era in process mining tool support. In: Ciardo, G., Darondeau, P. (eds.) ICATPN 2005. LNCS, vol. 3536, pp. 444–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.: Process-aware information systems: bridging people and software through process technology (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Georgakopoulos, D., Hornick, M., Sheth, A.: An overview of workflow management: From process modeling to workflow automation infrastructure. Distributed and Parallel Databases 3(2), 119–153 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grefen, P., Pernici, B., Sánchez, G.: Database Support for Workflow Management: The Wide Project. Kluwer Academic Pub., Dordrecht (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Herbst, J., Karagiannis, D.: Workflow mining with InWoLvE. Computers in Industry 53(3), 245–264 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herrmann, T., Hoffmann, M.: The Metamorphoses of Workflow Projects in their Early Stages. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 14(5), 399–432 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    IDS Scheer. ARIS Process Performance Manager (ARIS PPM) (2002),
  17. 17.
    Kraut, R.E., Fussell, S.R., Brennan, S.E., Siegel, J.: Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. Distributed work, pp. 137–162 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kueng, P.: The effects of workflow systems on organizations: A qualitative study. In: Van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business process management: Models, techniques, and empirical studies, pp. 301–316. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lawrence, P. (ed): Workflow Handbook 1997, Workflow Management Coalition. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mohan, C., Alonso, G., Gunthor, R., Kamath, M.: Exotica: A Research Perspective on Workflow Management Systems. Data Engineering Bulletin 18(1), 19–26 (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oba, M., Onada, S., Komoda, N.: Evaluating the quantitative effects of workflow systems based on real cases. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, vol. 6, p. 6031. IEEE, Washington, DC (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The Effectivenes of Workflow Management Systems: Predictions and Lessons Learned. International Journal of Information Management 56(5), 457–471 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sengupta, K., Zhao, J.L.: Improving the communicational effectiveness of virtual organizations through workflow automation. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 3(1), 49–69 (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steinfield, C., Jang, C.Y., Pfaff, B.: Supporting virtual team collaboration: the TeamSCOPE system. In: Proceedings of the international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work, pp. 81–90 (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Townsend, A.M., DeMarie, S.M., Hendrickson, A.R.: Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. IEEE Engineering Management Review 28(2), 69–80 (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Technology Management, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O.Box 513, NL-5600 MB, EindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Industrial Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologySouth Korea

Personalised recommendations