Advertisement

Instances over Algorithms: A Different Approach to Business Process Modeling

  • Stefan Hofer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 92)

Abstract

Most of today’s approaches to business process modeling interpret processes as algorithms. As a result, modelers often try to cover every possible outcome of a process. This algorithmic view increases the amount of information that has to be captured and reviewed. As an alternative, we propose to focus on exemplary process instances instead. We call this concept Exemplary Modeling and have built a modeling method around it. In this paper we explain its merits and illustrate its feasibility by reporting on our practical experience.

Keywords

business process modeling requirements engineering instance modeling CSCW 

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal, R., Bruno, G., Torchiano, M.: Instance Modelling – Beyond Object-Oriented Modelling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Technology (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group: BPMN Graphical Elements, http://www.bpmn.org/Samples/Elements/Gateways.htm (last visited 2011-06-30)
  3. 3.
    Breitling, H., Kornstädt, A., Sauer, J.: Design Rationale in Exemplary Business Process Modeling. In: Dutoit, A., McCall, R., Mistrik, I., Paech, B. (eds.) Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pp. 191–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carroll, J.: Making Use. Scenario-Based Design of Human-Computer Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cockburn, A.: Writing Effective Use Cases. Addison-Wesley Longman, Amsterdam (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacobson, I., Ericsson, M., Jacobson, A.: The Object Advantage: Business Process Reengineering with Object Technology. Addison-Wesley Longman, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacobson, I., Christerson, M., Jonsson, P., Overgaard, G.: Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krabbel, A., Wetzel, I., Ratuski, S.: Participation of Heterogeneous User Groups: Providing an Integrated Hospital Information System. In: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference PDC 1996, pp. 241–249 (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Open Models Initiative Website, http://www.openmodels.at/web/bpm (last visited 2011-06-30)
  10. 10.
    Parsons, J., Wand, Y.: Emancipating Instances from the Tyranny of Classes in Information Modeling. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 25(2), 228–268 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ross, D.T., Schoman, K.E.: Structured Analysis for Requirements Definition. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-3(1), 6–15 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schrepfer, M., Wolf, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: The Impact of Secondary Notation on Process Model Understanding. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) PoEM 2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 39, pp. 161–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shipman, F.M., McCall, R.J.: Supporting Knowledge-Base Evolution With Incremental Formalization. In: Proceedings of the ACM Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference 1994, pp. 285–291 (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wegner, P.: Why Interaction is More Powerful Than Algorithms. Communications of the ACM 40(5), 80–91 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Züllighoven, H.: Object-Oriented Construction Handbook. dpunkt.verlag, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Hofer
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Informatics, Software Engineering GroupUniversity of HamburgGermany
  2. 2.C1 WPS GmbHGermany

Personalised recommendations