Abstract
In many modern enterprises, explicit business process definitions facilitate the pursuit of business goals in such ways as best practice reuse, process analysis, process efficiency improvement, and automation. Most real-world business processes are large and complex. Successfully capturing, analysing, and automating these processes requires process definition languages that capture a variety of process aspects with a wealth of details. Most current process modeling languages, such as Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), focus on structural control flows among activities while providing inadequate support for other process definition needs. In this paper, we first illustrate these inadequacies through our experiences with a collection of real-world reference business processes from the Australian lending industry. We observe that the most significant inadequacies include lack of resource management, exception handling, process variation, and data flow integration. These identified shortcomings led us to consider the Little-JIL language as a vehicle for defining business processes. Little-JIL addresses the afore-mentioned inadequacies with a number of innovative features. Our investigation concludes that these innovative features are effective in addressing a number of key reference business process definition needs.
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
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Lending Industry XML Initiative (LIXI), http://www.lixi.org.au
van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: Yet Another Workflow Language. Information Systems 30(4), 245–275 (2005)
Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Dreiling, A., Knackstedt, R., Kuropka, D.: Configurative Process Modeling - Outlining an Approach to Increased Business Process Model Usability. In: Information Resources Management Association Conference (2004)
Desai, N., Mallya, A.K., Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Interaction protocols as design abstractions for business processes. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 31(12), 1015–1027 (2005)
Eriksson, H.-E., Penker, M.: Business modeling with UML: Business Patterns at Work. John Wiley & Sons, New York (2000)
Georgakopoulos, D., Hornick, M.F., Sheth, A.P.: An Overview of Workflow Management: From Process Modeling to Workflow Automation Infrastructure. Distributed and Parallel Database (3), 119–153 (1995)
Grigori, D., Casati, F., Dayal, U., Shan, M.-C.: Improving Business Process Quality through Exception Understanding, Prediction, and Prevention. In: 27th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB) (2001)
Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: What business process modelers can learn from programmers. Science of Computer Programming 65(1), 4–13 (2007)
Klein, M., Dellarocas, C.: A Knowledge-Based Approach to Handling Exceptions in Workflow Systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 9, 339–412 (2000)
Laguna, M., Marklund, J.: Business process modeling, simulation, and design. Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (2004)
Muehlen, Z., Rosemann, M.M.: Multiparadigm process management. In: The Fifth Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS) (2004)
OMG, Business Process Modeling Notation Specification (version 1.0 Final Adopted Version) (2006)
Osterweil, L.: Software Processes Are Software, Too, Revisited. In: 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Boston, MA, pp. 540–558 (1997)
Osterweil, L., Sondheimer, N.K., Clarke, L.A., Katsh, E., Rainey, D.: Using Process Definitions to Facilitate the Specifications of Requirements. In: Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA (2006)
Rolland, C.: A comprehensive View of Process Engineering. In: Pernici, B., Thanos, C. (eds.) CAiSE 1998. LNCS, vol. 1413, Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Exception Handling Patterns in Process-Aware Information Systems, BPM Center Report BPM-06-04 (2006)
Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Mulyar, N.: Workflow Control-Flow Patterns: A Revised View, BPMcenter.org BPM Center Report BPM-06-22 (2006)
Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow Data Patterns, Queensland University of Technology FIT-TR-2004-01 (2004)
Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: newYAWL: Achieving Comprehensive Patterns Support in Workflow for the Control-Flow, Data and Resource Perspectives, BPMcenter.org (2007)
Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow Resource Patterns, Eindhoven University of Technology BETA Working Paper Series, WP. 127 (2004)
Simidchieva, B.I., Clarke, L.A., Osterweil, L.J.: Representing Process Variation with a Process Family. In: International Conference on Software Process (ICSP) (2007)
Ward, P.T.: The transformation schema: An extension of the data flow diagram to represent control and timing. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 12(2), 198–210 (2005)
Wise, A.: Little-JIL 1.5 Language Report, Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Zhu, L., Osterweil, L.J., Staples, M., Kannengiesser, U. (2008). Challenges Observed in the Definition of Reference Business Processes. In: ter Hofstede, A., Benatallah, B., Paik, HY. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4928. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78238-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78238-4_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-78237-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-78238-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)