Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On-the-Fly Change Propagation for the Co-evolution of Business Processes

  • Conference paper
On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2013 Conferences (OTM 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 8185))

Abstract

In large organisations multiple stakeholders may modify the same business process. This paper addresses the problem when stakeholders perform changes on process views which become inconsistent with the business process and other views. Related work addressing this problem is based on execution trace analysis which is performed in a post-analysis phase and can be complex when dealing with large business process models. In this paper we propose a design-based approach that can efficiently check consistency criteria and propagate changes on-the-fly from a process view to its reference process and related process views. The technique is based on consistent specialisation of business processes and supports the data- and control flow perspective. This technique reduces the steps performed in the evolution of business processes by embedding the consistency checks and change propagation into the change enactment phase of the evolution.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. Springer (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gerth, C., Küster, J., Engels, G.: Language-independent change management of process models. In: Schürr, A., Selic, B. (eds.) MODELS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5795, pp. 152–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Weske, M.: Propagating changes between aligned process models. Journal of Systems and Software 85(8), 1885–1898 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Smirnov, S., Reijers, H., Weske, M., Nugteren, T.: Business process model abstraction: a definition, catalog, and survey. Distributed and Parallel Databases 30, 63–99 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Eshuis, R., Grefen, P.: Constructing customized process views. Data & Knowledge Engineering 64, 419–438 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Reichert, M., Kolb, J., Bobrik, R., Bauer, T.: Enabling personalized visualization of large business processes through parameterizable views. In: Proc. ACM SAC, pp. 1653–1660. ACM Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mafazi, S., Mayer, W., Grossmann, G., Stumptner, M.: A knowledge-based approach to the configuration of business process model abstractions. In: Int’l Workshop on Knowledge-intensive Business Processes (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Weidlich, M., Weske, M., Mendling, J.: Change propagation in process models using behavioural profiles. In: Proc. IEEE SCC, pp. 33–40 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Küster, J.M., Koehler, J., Ryndina, K.: Improving Business Process Models with Reference Models in Business-Driven Development. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 35–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schrefl, M., Stumptner, M.: Behavior-consistent specialization of object life cycles. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 11(1), 92–148 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Information & Software Technology 50(12), 1281–1294 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cytron, R., Ferrante, J., Rosen, B.K., Wegman, M.N., Zadeck, F.K.: Efficiently computing static single assignment form and the control dependence graph. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 13, 451–490 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Weidlich, M., Mendling, J.: Perceived consistency between process models. Information Systems 37(2), 80–98 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Basten, T., van der Aalst, W.M.: Inheritance of behavior. The Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming 47(2), 47–145 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M., Sadiq, W., Foulger, C.: Data flow and validation in workflow modelling. In: Proc. Australasian DB Conf., pp. 207–214 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Weber, B., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: Change patterns and change support features in process-aware information systems. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 574–588. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fahland, D., Favre, C., Jobstmann, B., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Instantaneous Soundness Checking of Industrial Business Process Models. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 278–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., Garcia-Banuelos, L., Kaarik, R.: Aligning business process models. In: Proc. of EDOC, pp. 45–53 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Brockmans, S., Ehrig, M., Koschmider, A., Oberweis, A., Studer, R.: Semantic alignment of business processes. In: Proc. of ICEIS, pp. 191–196 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Castelo Branco, M., Troya, J., Czarnecki, K., Küster, J., Völzer, H.: Matching business process workflows across abstraction levels. In: France, R.B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds.) MODELS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7590, pp. 626–641. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Weidlich, M., Dijkman, R., Weske, M.: Deciding behaviour compatibility of complex correspondences between process models. In: Hull, R., Mendling, J., Tai, S. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6336, pp. 78–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Liu, D.R., Shen, M.: Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process-view approach. Information Systems 28(6), 505–532 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., Bauer, T.: View-based process visualization. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 88–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao, X., Liu, C., Sadiq, W., Kowalkiewicz, M.: Process view derivation and composition in a dynamic collaboration environment. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2008, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5331, pp. 82–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Fdhila, W., Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: Change propagation in collaborative processes scenarios. In: Proc. CollaborateCom 2012, pp. 452–461 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Weidmann, M., Alvi, M., Koetter, F., Leymann, F., Renner, T., Schumm, D.: Business process change management based on process model synchronization of multiple abstraction levels. In: Proc. SOCA. IEEE Computer Society (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dam, K.H., Winikoff, M.: Generation of repair plans for change propagation. In: Luck, M., Padgham, L. (eds.) AOSE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4951, pp. 132–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ekanayake, C.C., La Rosa, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Fauvet, M.-C.: Fragment-based version management for repositories of business process models. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7044, pp. 20–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Gerth, C.: Business Process Models. LNCS, vol. 7849. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: the Provop approach. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 22(6-7), 519–546 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Knackstedt, R.: Adaptive reference modeling: Integrating configurative and generic adaptation techniques for information models. In: Reference Modeling, pp. 27–58. Physica-Verlag HD (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kurniawan, T.A., Ghose, A.K., Dam, H.K., Lê, L.-S.: Relationship-preserving change propagation in process ecosystems. In: Liu, C., Ludwig, H., Toumani, F., Yu, Q. (eds.) ICSOC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7636, pp. 63–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Küster, J., Gerth, C., Engels, G.: Dependent and conflicting change operations of process models. In: Paige, R.F., Hartman, A., Rensink, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 158–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia

    Shamila Mafazi, Georg Grossmann, Wolfgang Mayer & Markus Stumptner

Authors
  1. Shamila Mafazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georg Grossmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wolfgang Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Markus Stumptner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. STAR Lab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Bldg G/10, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Robert Meersman

  2. CRAN, University of Lorraine, Campus Sciences, BP 70239, 54506, Vandoevre-les-Nancy, France

    Hervé Panetto

  3. Computer Science and Computer Engineering, La Trobe University, 3086, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Tharam Dillon

  4. Dept. of Informatics Systems, University of Klagenfurt, Universitaetsstrasse 65, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria

    Johann Eder

  5. LIRMM, University of Montpellier II, 161 Rue Ada, 34392, Montpellier Cedex 5, France

    Zohra Bellahsene

  6. Department of Informatics, University of Hamburg, 22527, Hamburg, Germany

    Norbert Ritter

  7. Department of Computer Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Pieter De Leenheer

  8. Computer and Information Science Department, University of Oregon, 97403, Eugene, OR, USA

    Deijing Dou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mafazi, S., Grossmann, G., Mayer, W., Stumptner, M. (2013). On-the-Fly Change Propagation for the Co-evolution of Business Processes. In: Meersman, R., et al. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2013 Conferences. OTM 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8185. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41029-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41030-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation