Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Workflow Evolution

  • Peter Dadam
  • Stefanie Rinderle-Ma
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_470

Synonyms

Adaptive workflow/process management; Process evolution; Schema evolution in process management systems; Schema evolution in workflow management systems; Workflow/process instance changes

Definition

The term evolution has been originally used in biology and means the progressive development of a species over time, i.e., the adaptation to changing environmental requirements. Business processes (which are often called workflows when implemented and thus automated within a workflow management system) also “live” within an environment (e.g., the enterprise or the market). This environment is typically highly dynamic, and thus the running workflows have to adapt to these changing requirements – i.e., to evolve – in order to keep up with the ever-changing business environment and provide their users with the competitive edge.

Workflow evolution implies two basic challenges: change realization and change discovery. Change realization means that it must be technicallypossible to...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Rinderle S, Reichert M, Dadam P. Correctness criteria for dynamic changes in workflow systems – a survey. Data Knowl Eng. 2004;50(1):9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reichert M, Weber B. Enabling flexibility in process-aware information systems. Springer; 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schonenberg H, Mans R, Russell N, Mulyar N, Aalst WMP. Process flexibility: a survey of contemporary approaches. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Enterprise Engineering I; 2008. p. 16–30.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heimann P, Joeris G, Krapp C, Westfechtel B. DYNAMITE: dynamic task nets for software process management. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering; 1996. p. 331–41.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Müller R, Greiner U, Rahm E. AgentWork: a workflow system supporting rule-based workflow adaptation. Data Knowl Eng. 2004;51(2):223–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adams M, ter Hofstede AHM, Edmond D, van der Aalst WMP. A service-oriented implementation of dynamic flexibility in workflows. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems; 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sadiq S, Sadiq W, Orlowska M. Pockets of flexibility in workflow specifications. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling; 2001. p. 513–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reichert M, Dadam P. ADEPTflex – supporting dynamic changes of workflows with-out losing control. J Intell Inf Syst. 1998;10(2):93–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Casati F, Ceri S, Pernici B, Pozzi G. Workflow evolution. Data Knowl Eng. 1998;24(3):211–38.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sadiq S, Marjanovic O, Orlowska M. Managing change and time in dynamic workflow processes. Int J Coop Inf Syst. 2000;9(1, 2):93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van der Aalst WMP. Exterminating the dynamic change bug: a concrete approach to support workflow change. Inf Syst Front. 2001;3(3):297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weske M. Formal foundation and conceptual design of dynamic adaptations in a workflow management system. In: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weber B, Rinderle S, Reichert M. Change patterns and change support features–enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Knowl Eng. 2008;66(3):438–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rinderle S, Reichert M, Dadam P. Disjoint and overlapping process changes: challenges, solutions, applications. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems; 2004. p. 101–20.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kochut K, Arnold J, Sheth A, Miller J, Kraemer E, Arpinar B, Cardoso J. IntelliGEN: a distributed workflow system for discovering protein-protein interactions. Distrib Parallel Database. 2003;13(1):43–72.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ly LT, Rinderle S, Dadam P. Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data Knowl Eng. 2008;64(1):3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rinderle S, Weber B, Reichert M, Wild W. Integrating process learning and process evolution – a semantics based approach. In: Proceedings of the International Conference Business Process Management; 2005. p. 252–67.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of UlmUlmGermany
  2. 2.University of ViennaViennaAustria

Section editors and affiliations

  • Barbara Pernici
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. di Elettronica e InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly