Abstract
Fairness has recently emerged as a challenging topic in many areas of computer science, as it is related to algorithms supporting decision-making, experimental research, and information access and processing. As (decision-intensive) business processes are inherently using information to reach their goals, their fairness possibly depends on the kind of information they are allowed to access. In this paper, we deal with this aspect and propose some criteria to consider when conceptually specifying business activities and their related information seamlessly through a recently proposed approach based on the concept of Activity View. More specifically, we distinguish equality and equity as two aspects of fairness and discuss how to enforce them in business process design. Their expression according to the specification of Activity Views is formally proposed and discussed in the paper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For sake of simplicity, in the following, we will focus only on the data accessed for the exam management – yellow path.
- 2.
We represent data access operations as a set as the same activity can imply the execution of different queries in many possible orders.
References
Angerschmid, A., Zhou, J., Theuermann, K., Chen, F., Holzinger, A.: Fairness and explanation in AI-informed decision making. Mach. Learn. Knowl. Extr. 4(2), 556–579 (2022)
Caton, S., Haas, C.: Fairness in machine learning: a survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 56(7), 1–38 (2024)
Combi, C., Oliboni, B., Weske, M., Zerbato, F.: Conceptual modeling of inter-dependencies between processes and data. In: ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), pp. 110–119. ACM (2018)
Combi, C., Oliboni, B., Weske, M., Zerbato, F.: Conceptual modeling of processes and data: connecting different perspectives. In: Trujillo, J.C., et al. (eds.) ER 2018. LNCS, vol. 11157, pp. 236–250. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00847-5_18
Combi, C., Oliboni, B., Zerbato, F.: Integrated exploration of data-intensive business processes. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 16(1), 383–397 (2023)
Demartini, G., Roitero, K., Mizzaro, S.: Data bias management. Commun. ACM 67(1), 28–32 (2023)
Hutchinson, B., Mitchell, M.: 50 years of test (un)fairness: lessons for machine learning. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* 2019, pp. 49–58. Association for Computing Machinery (2019)
Jagadish, H.V., Stoyanovich, J., Howe, B.: The many facets of data equity. ACM J. Data Inf. Qual. 14(4), 27:1–27:21 (2022)
Kasy, M., Abebe, R.: Fairness, equality, and power in algorithmic decision-making. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 576–586. Association for Computing Machinery (2021)
Lee, M.K., Jain, A., Cha, H.J., Ojha, S., Kusbit, D.: Procedural justice in algorithmic fairness: leveraging transparency and outcome control for fair algorithmic mediation. Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. 3(CSCW), 182:1–182:26 (2019)
Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., Galstyan, A.: A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Comput. Surv. 54(6), 1–35 (2021)
Narayanan, A.: Translation tutorial: 21 fairness definitions and their politics. In: Proceedings of Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, vol. 1170, p. 3 (2018)
Object Management Group. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), v2.0.2 (2014). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.2/
Pujol, D., Machanavajjhala, A.: Equity and privacy: more than just a tradeoff. IEEE Secur. Priv. 19(6), 93–97 (2021)
Ramadan, Q., Strüber, D., Salnitri, M., Jürjens, J., Riediger, V., Staab, S.: A semi-automated BPMN-based framework for detecting conflicts between security, data-minimization, and fairness requirements. Softw. Syst. Model. 19(5), 1191–1227 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00781-x
Reichert, M.: Process and data: two sides of the same coin? In: Meersman, R., et al. (eds.) OTM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7565, pp. 2–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33606-5_2
Steen, M.: Ethics as a participatory and iterative process. Commun. ACM 66(5), 27–29 (2023)
Zehlike, M., Yang, K., Stoyanovich, J.: Fairness in ranking, part II: learning-to-rank and recommender systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 55(6), 1–41 (2022)
Zehlike, M., Yang, K., Stoyanovich, J.: Fairness in ranking, part I: score-based ranking. ACM Comput. Surv. 55(6), 118:1–118:36 (2023)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2025 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amico, B., Combi, C., Dalla Vecchia, A., Migliorini, S., Oliboni, B., Quintarelli, E. (2025). Enhancing Business Process Models with Ethical Considerations. In: Kaczmarek-Heß, M., Rosenthal, K., Suchánek, M., Da Silva, M.M., Proper, H.A., Schnellmann, M. (eds) Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing. EDOC 2024 Workshops . EDOC 2024. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 537. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-79059-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-79059-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-79058-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-79059-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)