Abstract
Until recently, efficiency gained through process automation and control was the main preoccupation of BPM practitioners. As a result, the majority of mainstream process modeling standards today is characterized by the imperative modeling style. This style encourages a modeler to commit to a well-determined process execution scenario already at the early design stages. For case management processes, however, a strict commitment to a predefined control flow is considered by organizations as a serious handicap. This is the main reason why case management as well as other knowledge-intensive processes in the organizations mostly remain “pen and paper”. In this article we demonstrate how configurable data objects and context-based configuration rules can be integrated into a process model in order to improve the process post-design adaptability and to pave the road for case management automated support. These concepts are defined as a part of DeCo (the Declarative Configurable process specification language). DeCo is a declarative modeling approach that is currently under development. We illustrate our results on the example.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Smith, H., Fingar, P.: Business Process Management: The Third Wave. Meghan-Kiffer Press (2003)
Barjis, J.: The Importance of Business Process Modeling in Software Systems Design. Journal of the Science of Computer Programming 71(1), 73–875 (2008)
Hill, J.B., Lheureux, B.J., Olding, E., Plummer, D.C., Rosser, B., Sinur, J.: Predicts 2010: Business Process Management Will Expand Beyond Traditional Boundaries, http://www.gartner.com/resId=1231219
OMG, Case Management Process Modeling (CMPM) Request For Proposal: Bmi/2009-09-23
Swenson, K.D.: Mastering the Unpredictable. How adaptive case management will revolutionize the way the knowledge workers get things done. Meghan-Kiffer Press (2010)
de Man, H.: Case Management: A Review of Modeling Approaches, BPTrends (January 2009)
Rychkova, I., Nurcan, S.: Towards Adaptability and Control for Knowledge-Intensive Business Processes: Declarative Configurable Process Specifications. In: Proc. 44th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2011)
Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow Management: Modeling Concepts, Architecture, and Implementation. International Thomson Computer Press (1996)
Barjis, J., Rychkova, I., Yilmaz, L.: Modeling and Simulation Driven Software Development. In: Chinni, M.J., Weed, D. (eds.) Spring Simulation Multi Conference, pp. 4–10 (2011)
OASIS Web Services Business Process Execution Language, WSBPEL (2006)
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Pi calculus versus Petri nets: Let us eat “humble pie” rather than further inflate the “Pi hype”. BP Trends 3(5), 1–11 (2005)
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Making Work Flow: On the Application of Petri Nets to Business Process Management. In: Esparza, J., Lakos, C. (eds.) ICATPN 2002. LNCS, vol. 2360, pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Information and Software Technology 50, 1281–1294 (2008)
Barjis, J.: Automatic Business Process Analysis and Simulation Based on DEMO. J. Enterprise Information Systems 1(4), 365–381 (2007)
Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology –Theory and Methodology. Springer, New York (2006)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Computer Science – Research and Development 23(2), 99–113 (2009)
Yu, E.S.K., Mylopoulos, J.: Understanding “why” in software process modeling, analysis, and design. In: The Proceedings of ICSE 1994, pp. 159–168 (1994)
Fahland, D., Lübke, D., Mendling, J., Reijers, H., Weber, B., Weidlich, M., Zugal, S.: Declarative versus Imperative Process Modeling Languages: The Issue of Understandability. 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. 353–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Wegmann, A.: On the Systemic Enterprise Architecture Methodology (SEAM). In: Proc. 5th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 483–490 (2003)
Wegmann, A., Lê, L.-S., Regev, G., Woods, B.: Enterprise Modeling Using the Foundation Concepts of the RM-ODP ISO/ITU. Standard Information Systems and E-Business Management, vol. 5, pp. 397–413 (2007)
Rolland, C., Prakash, N., Benjamen, A.: A Multi-Model View of Process Modeling. In: Requirements Engineering, vol. 4(4). Springer, London (1999)
Nurcan, S., Etien, A., Kaabi, A., Zoukar, I., Rolland, C.: A Strategy Driven Business Process Modelling Approach. Special issue of the Business Process Management Journal on Goal-Oriented Business Process Modeling (2005)
Korherr, B., List, B.: Extending the EPC and the BPMN with Business Process Goals and Performance Measures. In: ICEIS, vol. (3), pp. 287–294 (2007)
Awad, A.: BPMN-Q: A Language to Query Business Processes. In: EMISA, pp. 115–128 (2007)
La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J.: Configurable multi-perspective business process models. Journal Information Systems 36(2) (2011)
La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J., Gottschalk, F.: Beyond Control-Flow: Extending Business Process Configuration to Roles and Objects. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olivé, A. (eds.) ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 199–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a Truly Declarative Service Flow Language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: DECLARE: Full Support for Loosely-Structured Processes. In: Spies, M., Blake, M.B. (eds.) Proc.11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC), pp. 287–298. IEEE (2007)
Rychkova, I., Regev, G., Wegmann, A.: Using Declarative Specification. In: Business Process Design. International Journal of Computer Science & Applications (2008)
Rychkova, I.: Formal semantics for refinement verification of entreprise models. Dir.: Alain Wegmann. Thèse EPFL, no 4210 (2008), http://library.epfl.ch/theses/?nr=4210
Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. The MIT Press (2006)
Rychkova, I., Nurcan, S.: The Old Therapy for the New Problem: Declarative Configurable Process Specifications for the Adaptive Case Management Support. In: zur Muehlen, M., Su, J. (eds.) BPM 2010 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 66, pp. 420–432. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Wirth, N.: Program development by stepwise refinement. Communications of the ACM (1971)
BPMI/OMG, Inc. Business Process Modeling Notation. Version 1.0 (February 6, 2006), http://www.bpmn.org/
Dey, A.: Understanding and Using Context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 5, 4–7 (2001)
Denekere, R., Rychkova, I., Nurcan, S.: Modeling the role variability in the MAP process model. In: Proc. RCIS (2011)
Rolland, C., Nurcan, S.: Business Process Lines to deal with the Variability. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA (January 2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rychkova, I. (2013). Towards Automated Support for Case Management Processes with Declarative Configurable Specifications. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2012. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 132. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36285-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36285-9_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-36284-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-36285-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)