Perspectives to Process Modeling – A Historical Overview

  • John Krogstie
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 113)

Abstract

Processes modeling is done for a number of reasons in relation to enterprise modeling, business process modeling and information systems development in general, and this paper will give an overview of main approaches to different types of process modeling. Modeling approaches are structured according to the main modeling perspective being used. In conceptual modeling in general, one can identify 8 modeling perspectives; behavioral, functional, structural, goal-oriented, object-oriented, language action, organizational and topological. In the paper we will present both historical and current examples of process modeling according to these different perspectives, and discuss what perspectives are most appropriate to achieve the different goals of modeling.

Keywords

Process modeling conceptual modeling 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aagesen, G., Krogstie, J.: Analysis and design of business processes using BPMN. In: Handbook on Business Process Management. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: TomTom for Business Process Management (TomTom4BPM). In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 2–5. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Formalization and Verification of Event-driven Process Chains. Information and Software Technology 41, 639–650 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Web Services and Formal Methods, pp. 1–23 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Computer Science-Research and Development 23(2) (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Nakatumba, J., Rozinat, A., Russel, N.: Business process simulation. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abdel-Hamid, T.K., Madnick, S.E.: Lessons Learned from Modeling the Dynamics of Software Development. Communications of the ACM 32(12) (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ader, M., Lu, G., Pons, P., Monguio, J., Lopez, L., De Michelis, G., Grasso, M.A., Vlondakis, G.: Woorks, an object-oriented workflow system for offices. Technical report, ITHACA (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ambriola, V., Conradi, R., Fuggetta, A.: Assessing Process-Centered Software Engineering Environments. ACM TOSEM 6(3) (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderl, R., Raßler, J.: Computer-Aided Innovation (CAI), Gaetano Cascini. IFIP, vol. 277. Springer, Boston (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Auramäki, E., Hirschheim, R., Lyytinen, K.: Modelling offices through discourse analysis: The SAMPO approach. The Computer Journal 35(4), 342–352 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Benson, I., Everhard, S., McKernan, A., Galewsky, B., Partridge, C.: Mathematical Structures for Reasoning about Emergent Organization. In: ACM CSCW Workshop: Beyond Workflow Management, Philadelphia, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bolcer, G., Kaiser, G.: SWAP: Leveraging the web to manage workflow. IEEE Internet Computing 3(1) (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I.: The Unified Modeling Language: User Guide. Addison-Wesley (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bubenko Jr. J. A., Rolland, C., Loucopoulos, P., DeAntonellis, V.: Facilitating fuzzy to formal requirements modeling. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Requirements Engineering (ICRE 1994), April 18-22, pp. 154–157. IEEE Computer Society Press, Colorado Springs (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Button, G.: What’s Wrong with Speech Act Theory. CSCW 3(1) (1995)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen, P.P.: The entity-relationship model: Towards a unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 1(1), 9–36 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Conradi, R., Jaccheri, M.L.: Process Modelling Languages. In: Derniame, J.-C., Kaba, B.A., Wastell, D. (eds.) Promoter-2 1998. LNCS, vol. 1500, pp. 27–52. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Curtis, B., Kellner, M.I., Over, J.: Process Modeling. CACM 35(9) (1992)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Gallo, S.: How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? Data & Knowledge Engineering 58, 358–380 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davis, A.M.: A comparison of techniques for the specification of external system behavior. Communications of the ACM 31(9), 1098–1115 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Derniame, J.-C., Kaba, B.A., Wastell, D. (eds.): Promoter-2 1998. LNCS, vol. 1500. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    De Michelis, G., Grasso, M.A.: Situating Conversations within the Language/Action Perspective: The Milan Conversation Model. In: ACM CSCW Conference, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA (1994)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: Integrating management of human and computer resources in task processing organizations: A conceptual view. In: HICCS’27, Maui, Hawaii, US, January 4-7 (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology – Theory and Methodology. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dignum, F., Weigand, H.: Communication and deontic logic. In: Wieringa, R., Feenstra, R. (eds.) Working papers of the International Workshop on Information Systems - Correctness and Reuseability, IS-CORE 1994 (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dourish, P., Holmes, J., MacLean, A., Marqvardsen, P., Zbyslaw, A.: Freeflow: Mediating between representation and action in workflow systems. In: ACM CSCW Conference, Boston, USA (1996)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dourish, P.: Re-Space-ing Place: “Place” and “Space” Ten Years. In: Proc. of ACM Conf. Computer-Supported Cooperative Work CSCW 2006, Banff, Canada, pp. 299–308. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fickas, S.: Design issues in a rule-based system. Journal of Systems and Software 10(2), 113–123 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fischer, L.: Excellence in Practice IV - Innovation and excellence in workflow and knowledge management. Workflow Management Coalition, Future Strategies, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fleischmann, A.: What is S-BPM? In: Buchwald, H., Fleischmann, A., Seese, D., Stary, C. (eds.) S-BPM ONE. CCIS, vol. 85, pp. 85–106. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fox, M.S., Gruninger, M.: Enterprise modeling. AI Magazine (2000)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gane, C., Sarson, T.: Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques. Prentice Hall (1979)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Geerts, G.L., McCarthy, W.E.: An Accounting Object Infrastructure for Knowledge-Based Enterprise Models. IEEE Intelligent Systems 14, 89–94 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Glance, N.S., Pagani, D.S., Pareschi, R.: Generalized Process Structure Grammars (GPSG) for Flexible Representation of Work. In: ACM CSCW Conference, Boston, USA (1996)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: An overview of declarative process modeling principles and languages. Com. of Systemics and Informatics World Network 6, 51–58 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gopalakrishnan, S., Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Adapting UML Activity Diagrams for Mobile Work Process Modelling: Experimental Comparison of Two Notation Alternatives. In: van Bommel, P., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Overbeek, S., Proper, E., Barjis, J. (eds.) PoEM 2010. LNBIP, vol. 68, pp. 145–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gopalakrishnan, S., Sindre, G.: Diagram Notations for Mobile Work Processes Presented at PoEM, Oslo Norway November 2-3 (2011)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gordijn, J., Yu, E., van der Raadt, B.: e-service Design using i* and e3value, IEEE Software (May- June 2006)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Green, P., Rosemann, M.: Integrated Process Modeling: An Ontological Evaluation. Information Systems 25(3) (2000)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Habermas, J.: The Theory of Communicative Action. Beacon Press (1984)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. Harper Business (1993)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Harel, D.S.: A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming (8), 231–274 (1987)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Harel, D., Lachover, H., Naamed, A., Pnueli, A., Politi, M., Sherman, R., Shtull-Trauring, A., Trakhtenbrot, M.: STATEMATE: a working environment for thedevelopment of complex reactive systems. IEEE TSE 16(4), 403–414 (1990)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Harrison, S., Dourish, P.: Re-Place-ing Space: The Roles of Space and Place in Collaborative Systems. In: Proc. CSCW 1996, Boston, MA, pp. 67–76. ACM, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Havey, M.: Essential Business Process Modelling. O’Reilly (2005)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hommes, B.-J., van Reijswoud, V.: The quality of business process modelling techniques. In: Conference on Information Systems Concepts, Leiden, Nertherlands. Kluwer (1999)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Houy, C., Fettke, P., Loos, P., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Krogstie, J.: BPM-in-the-Large – Towards a higher level of abstraction in Business Process Management. Paper Presented at GISP under WCC 2010, Brisbane, Australia (September 2010)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hruby, P.: Model-Driven Design Using Business Patterns. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    IDEF-3x Process Modeling Language Specification, Standard NA-94-1422B, Rockwell International (1993)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jarke, M., Bubenko Jr., J., Rolland, C., Sutcliffe, A., Vassiliou, Y.: Theories underlying requirements engineering: An overview of NATURE at genesis. In: Proceedings of RE 1993, pp. 19–31 (1993)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jensen, K., Kristiansen, L.M., Wells, L.: Coloured petri nets and CPN tools got modelling and validation of concurrent systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 9(3-4), 213–254 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kappel, G., Rausch-Schott, S., Retschitzegger, W.: Coordination in workflow management systems a rule-based approach. In: Coordination Technology for Collaborative Applications, pp. 99-119 (1998)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Keller, G., Nüttgens, M., Scheer, A.W.: Semantische Prozeßmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Prozeßketten (EPK) (1992)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Krogstie, J., McBrien, P., Owens, R., Seltveit, A.H.: Information Systems Development Using a Combination of Process and Rule Based Approaches. In: Andersen, R., Sølvberg, A., Bubenko Jr., J.A. (eds.) CAiSE 1991. LNCS, vol. 498, pp. 319–335. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Krogstie, J., Jørgensen, H.D.: Interactive Models for Supporting Networked Organisations. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3084, pp. 550–563. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A., Brinkkemper, S. (eds.): Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Krogstie, J., Sindre, G.: Utilizing deontic operators in information systems specifications. Requirement Engineering Journal 1, 210–237 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Krogstie, J.: Integrated Goal, Data and Process modeling: From TEMPORA to Model-Generated Work-Places. In: Johannesson, P., Søderstrøm, E. (eds.) Information Systems Engineering From Data Analysis to Process Networks, pp. 43–65. IGI Publishing (2008)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Krogstie, J.: Model-based Development and Evolution of Information Systems: A Quality Approach. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kuntz, J.C., Christiansen, T.R., Cohen, G.P., Jin, Y., Levitt, R.E.: The virtual design team: A computational simulation model of project organizations. Communications of the ACM 41(11) (1998)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lillehagen, F., Krogstie, J.: Active Knowledge Modeling of Enterprises. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lindland, O.I., Krogstie, J.: Validating Conceptual Models by Transformational Prototyping. In: Rolland, C., Cauvet, C., Bodart, F. (eds.) CAiSE 1993. LNCS, vol. 685, pp. 165–183. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Loos, P., Allweyer, T.: Process orientation and object-orientation - An approach for integrating UML with event-driven process chains (EPC), Germany (1998)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lu, R., Sadiq, S., Governatori, G.: On managing business processes variants. Data & Knowledge Engineering 68(7), 642–664 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lu, R., Sadiq, W.: A Survey of Comparative Business Process Modeling Approaches. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4439, pp. 82–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Marsan, M.A., et al. (eds.): Proceeding of the International workshop on Timed Petri Nets, Torino, Italy. IEEE Computer Society Press (1985)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    McCarthy, W.E.: The REA accounting model: a generalized framework for accounting systems in a shared data environment. The Accounting Review 57, 554–578 (1982)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Medina-Mora, R., Winograd, T., Flores, R., Flores, F.: The Action Workflow approach to workflow management technology. In: ACM CSCW Conference (1992)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Mili, H., Tremblay, G., Jaoude, G.B., Lefebvre, É., Elabed, L., El Boussaidi, G.: Business process modeling languages: Sorting through the alphabet soup. ACM Comput. Surv. 43(1), Article 4 (December 2010)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mühlen, M.Z., Becker, J.: Workflow management and object-orientation - A matter of perspectives or why perspectives matter. In: OOPSLA Workshop on Object-Oriented Workflow Management, Denver, USA (1999)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Nossum, A., Krogstie, J.: Integrated Quality of Models and Quality of Maps. In: Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Ukor, R. (eds.) BPMDS 2009 and EMMSAD 2009. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 264–276. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Nysetvold, A.G., Krogstie, J.: Assessing Business Process Modeling Languages Using a Generic Quality Framework. In: Siau, K. (ed.) Advanced Topics in Database Research, vol. 5, pp. 79–93. Idea Group, Hershey (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Olle, T.W., Hagelstein, J., MacDonald, I.G., Rolland, C., Sol, H.G., van Assche, F.J.M., Verrijn-Stuart, A.A.: Information Systems Methodologies. Addison-Wesley (1988)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    OMG, Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Rules Interim Specification (2006b), http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?dtc/06/03/02 (retrieved January 1, 2006)
  76. 76.
    OMG. BPMN v2 Specification. Technical report, OMG (January 2011) (http://www.omg.org/), http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/
  77. 77.
    Ould, M.A.: Business Processes - Modeling and Analysis for Re-engineering and Improvement. Wiley, Beverly Hills (1995)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A Declarative Approach for Flexible Business Processes Management. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Petri, C.A.: Kommunikation mit automaten (in German). Schriften des Rheinisch-Westfalischen Institut fur Instrumentelle Mathematik an der Universität Bonn (2) (1962)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Krogstie, J.: Ontology- versus pattern-based evaluation of process modeling language: A comparison. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 20, 774–799 (2007)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Scheer, A.-W., Nüttgens, M.: ARIS Architecture and Reference Models for Business Process Management, pp. 301–304 (2000)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Searle, J.R.: Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press (1969)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Searle, J.R.: Expression and Meaning. Cambridge University Press (1979)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Searle, J.R., Vanderveken, D.: Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge University Press (1985)Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Senge, P.: The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Century Business Publishers, London (1990)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Singh, B., Rein, G.L.: Role Interaction Nets (RINs); A Process Description Formalism, Technical Report CT-083-92, MCC, Austin, Texas (1992)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Stachowiak, H.: Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Springer, Wien (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Suchman, L.: Do categories have politics? CSCW 2(3) (1994)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Swenson, K.D., et al.: A business process environment supporting collaborative planning. Journal of Collaborative Computing 1(1) (1994)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Adams, M., Russell, N. (eds.): Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and its Support Environment. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    UMM - UN/CEFACT Modeling Methodology User Guide (2007)Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Ward, P.T.: The transformation schema: An extension of the dataflow diagram to represent control and timing. IEEE Transactions on SE 12(2), 198–210 (1986)Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Wegner, P., Goldin, D.: Interaction as a Framework for Modeling. In: Chen, P.P., Akoka, J., Kangassalu, H., Thalheim, B. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling. LNCS, vol. 1565, pp. 243–257. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. (2007)Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    WfMC Workflow Handbook 2001. Workflow Management Coalition, Future Strategies Inc., Lighthouse Point, Florida, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    White. S.A. Introduction to BPMN. IBM Cooperation (2004)Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Winograd, T., Flores, F.: Understanding Computers and Cognition. A-W (1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Krogstie
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyNorway

Personalised recommendations