Business Process Frameworks

Chapter
Part of the International Handbooks on Information Systems book series (INFOSYS)

Abstract

In Business Process Management (BPM) research as well as in practice, a whole host of different Business Process Frameworks supporting various tasks connected with BPM in organizations have been introduced and further developed. However, the term Business Process Framework is ambiguous and has been used for different BPM-related systemization approaches concerning BPM methods and techniques. Against the background that so far no attempt to systemize the different meanings and understandings of the term Business Process Framework is known, this article aims at clarifying this term by analyzing and systemizing its different facets giving an overview of available understandings and usages of the term. The identified facets are investigated and several different classes of Business Process Frameworks are described and explained in more detail. In this context, one predominant class of Business Process Frameworks summarizing business process reference models is presented in more detail.

References

  1. AMICE EC (ed) (1993) CIMOSA – open systems architecture for CIM. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardalani P, Houy C, Fettke P, Loos P (2013) Towards a minimal cost of change approach for inductive reference model development. In: Proceedings of the 21st European conference on information systems (ECIS 2013). AIS, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  3. Barros O (2007) Business process patterns and frameworks: reusing knowledge in process innovation. Bus Process Manage J 13(1):47–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker J, Meise V (2011) Strategy and organizational frame. In: Becker J, Kugeler M, Rosemann M (eds) Process management. A guide for the design of business processes. Springer, Berlin, pp 91–132Google Scholar
  5. Bhat JM, Fernandez J, Kumar M, Goel S (2014) Business process outsourcing: learning from cases of a global offshore outsourcing provider. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 2, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 443–470Google Scholar
  6. Bolstorff PA, Rosenbaum RG, Poluha RG (2007) Spitzenleistungen im Supply Chain Management – Ein Praxishandbuch zur Optimierung mit SCOR. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. Boukhebouze M, Amghar Y, Benharkat A-N, Maamar Z (2009) Towards self-healing execution of business processes based on rules. In: Filipe J, Cordeiro J (eds) Enterprise information systems, LNBIP, vol 24, Springer, Berlin, pp 501–512Google Scholar
  8. Cater-Steel A, Tan W-G, Toleman M (2009) Using institutionalism as a lens to examine ITIL adoption and diffusion. In: 20th Australasian conference on information systems (ACIS 2009), Melbourne, pp 321–330Google Scholar
  9. Chou T-H, Seng J-L, Lin B (2008) eTOM and e-services based trouble-management operations: a large scale telecom case study. Int J Technol Manage 43(4):383–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cragg P, Mills A (2011) IT support for business processes in SMEs. Bus Process Manage J 17(5):697–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cragg P, Tagliavini M, Mills A (2007) Evaluating the alignment of IT with business processes in SMEs. In: 18th Australasian conference on information systems (ACIS 2007), Toowoomba, pp 38–48Google Scholar
  12. Davis M, Sigal R, Weyuker EJ (1994) Computability, complexity, and languages: fundamentals of theoretical computer science, 2nd edn. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  13. Desel J, Juhás G (2001) What is a Petri net? – Informal answers for the informed reader. In: Ehrig H, Juhás G, Padberg J, Rozenberg G (eds) Unifying Petri Nets-Advances in Petri nets. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferstl OK, Sinz EJ (1995) Das Ansatz des Semantischen Objektmodells (SOM) zur Modellierung von Geschäftsprozessen. Wirtschaftsinformatik 37(3):209–220Google Scholar
  15. Fettke P (2008) Empirisches Business Engineering. Grundlegung und ausgewählte Ergebnisse. Fakultät Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Universität des Saarlandes, SaarbrückenGoogle Scholar
  16. Fettke P (2009) How conceptual modeling is used. Commun Assoc Inform Syst (CAIS) 25(43):571–592Google Scholar
  17. Fettke P, Loos P (eds) (2007) Reference modeling for business systems analysis. Idea, HersheyGoogle Scholar
  18. Frank U (1994) Multiperspektivische Unternehmensmodellierung – Theoretischer Hintergrund und Entwurf einer objektorientierten Entwicklungsumgebung. Oldenbourg, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  19. Harmon P (2014) The scope and evolution of business process management. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 1, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 37–80Google Scholar
  20. Hesson M, Geray O (2010) ITIL-based service management empirical case study. International multi-conference of engineers and computer scientists (IMECS 2010), Hong Kong, pp 729–734Google Scholar
  21. Hrastnik J, Cardoso J, Kappe F (2007) The business process knowledge framework. In: The ninth international conference on enterprise information systems 2007 (ICEIS 2007), Funchal, 2007Google Scholar
  22. Karagiannis D, Woitsch R (2014) Knowledge engineering in business process management. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 2, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 623–648Google Scholar
  23. Keller G, Teufel T (1998) SAP R/3 process oriented implementation - iterative process prototyping. Addison-Wesley, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  24. Lapão LV, Rebuge Á, Silva MM, Gomes R (2009) ITIL assessment in a healthcare environment: the role of IT governance at hospital São Sebastião. In: Adlassnig K-P, Blobel B, Mantas J, Masic I (eds) Medical informatics in a united and healthy Europe (MIE 2009). IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 76–80Google Scholar
  25. Li L, Su Q, Chen X (2011) Ensuring supply chain quality performance through applying the SCOR model. Int J Prod Res 49(1):33–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Markovic I (2010) Semantic business process modeling. Institut für Angewandte Informatik und Formale Beschreibungsverfahren (AIFB), Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  27. Marrone M, Kolbe LM (2011) Uncovering ITIL claims: IT executives’ perception on benefits and business-IT alignment. Inf Syst e-Bus Manage 9(3):363–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meziani R, Saleh I (2010) E-government: ITIL-based service management case study. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on information integration and web-based applications & services (iiWAS2010), ACM, New York, pp 509–516Google Scholar
  29. Nüttgens M, Rump FJ (2002) Syntax und Semantik Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). In: Desel J, Weske M (eds) Prozessorientierte Methoden und Werkzeuge für die Entwicklung von Informationssystemen (Promise 2002). GI, Bonn, pp 64–77Google Scholar
  30. Österle H (1995) Business Engineering – Prozeß- und Systementwicklung – Band 1: Entwurfstechniken, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Otto B, Wäsch J (2003) A Model for Inter-Organizational Business Process Integration. In: Uhr W, Esswein W, Schoop E (eds) Wirtschaftsinformatik 2003, vol 1, Medien – Märkte – Mobilität. Physica, Heidelberg, pp 425–445Google Scholar
  32. Pickering C, Wynn E (2004) An architecture and business process framework for global team collaboration. Intel Technol J 8(4):373–382Google Scholar
  33. Rosemann M, vom Brocke J (2014) The six core elements of business process management. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 1, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 105–122Google Scholar
  34. Scheer A-W (1994) Business process engineering – reference models for industrial enterprises, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  35. Scheer A-W (1998) ARIS- business process frameworks, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Srivastava B, Mazzoleni P (2010) An APQC-PCF based framework to compare service offerings in business transformation projects. In: Shin SY, Ossowski S, Schumacher M, Palakal MJ, Hung C-C (eds) 25th annual ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC 2010). ACM, Sierre, pp 73–78Google Scholar
  37. Tanovic A, Androulidakis I (2011) Producing a new model for the eTOM standard through an empirical study. 19th Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR 2011), Belgrade, pp 94–97Google Scholar
  38. Thomas O (2006) Understanding the term reference model in information systems research: history, literature analysis and explanation. In: Bussler C, Haller A (eds) Business process management workshops: BPM 2005, LNCS, vol 3812, Springer, Berlin, pp 484–496Google Scholar
  39. Tregear R (2014) Business process standardization. In: vom Brocke J, Rosemann M (eds) Handbook on business process management, vol 2, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 421–442Google Scholar
  40. van der Aalst WMP (1999) Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Inf Softw Technol 41:639–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vo CC, Chilamkurti N, Loke SW, Torabi T (2011) Radio-Mama: an RFID based Business Process Framework for asset management. J Netw Comput Appl 34(3):990–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. vom Brocke J (2003) Referenzmodellierung – Gestaltung und Verteilung von Konstruktionsprozessen. Logos, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  43. vom Brocke J (2007) Design principles for reference modelling. Reusing information models by means of aggregation, specialisation, instantiation, and analogy. In: Fettke P, Loos P (eds) Reference modelling for business systems analysis. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, pp 47–75Google Scholar
  44. Yuan S, Shen J (2007) QoS-Aware service selection in P2P-based Business Process Frameworks. In: The 4th IEEE international conference on enterprise computing, E-Commerce and E-Services (EEE 2007), Tokyo, pp 675–682Google Scholar
  45. Zachman JA (1987) A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst J 26(3):276–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhou H, Benton WC Jr, Schilling DA, Milligan GW (2011) Supply chain integration and the SCOR model. J Bus Log 32(4):332–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Information Systems (IWi)German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI) and Saarland UniversitySaarbrückenGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Information Systems (IWi)German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)SaarbrückenGermany
  3. 3.Saarland University German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)SaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations