skip to main content
10.1145/2463676.2467802acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
tutorial

Data management perspectives on business process management: tutorial overview

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Traditional approaches to Business Process Management (BPM) focus primarily on the process aspects, and treat the persistent data accessed and manipulated by the business processes as second class citizens. A recent approach to BPM, based on "business artifacts", is centered on a modeling framework that places data and process on an equal footing. The approach has been shown useful in various application domains, and one variant of business artifacts forms the basis of the emerging OMG Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) standard. Research results have been developed around conceptual models, enterprise interoperation, business intelligence, and verification. This data-centric approach has the potential to provide the basis for a new generation of BPM technology in support of diverse application, and fueled by the insights into abstraction and data management that have been the hallmark of database research since the 70's.

References

  1. Artifact-centric service interoperation (ACSI) web site, 2011.small http:/acsi-project.eu/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. P. Athena. Flower user manual. Technical report, Pallas Athena BV, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. B. Bagheri Hariri, D. Calvanese, M. Montali, G. De Giacomo, and A. Deutsch. Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. In Proc. ACM PODS, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. K. Bhattacharya, N. S. Caswell, S. Kumaran, A. Nigam, and F. Y. Wu. Artifact-centered operational modeling: Lessons from customer engagements. IBM Sys. J., 46(4):703--721, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. K. Bhattacharya et al. A model-driven approach to industrializing discovery processes in pharmaceutical research. IBM Systems Journal, 44(1):145--162, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. BizAgi and others. Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN), FTF Beta 1, Jan. 2013. OMG Document Number dtc/2013-01-01, Object Management Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T. Chao et al. Artifact-based transformation of IBM Global Financing: A case study. In Intl. Conf. on Business Process Management (BPM), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. P. P. Chen. The entity-relationship model -- toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 1:9--36, 1976. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. E. Damaggio, A. Deutsch, and V. Vianu. Artifact systems with data dependencies and arithmetic. In Proc. ICDT, pages 66--77, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. E. Damaggio, R. Hull, and R. Vaculín. On the equivalence of incremental and fixpoint semantics for business artifacts with guard-stage-milestone lifecycles. Info. Syst., 38:561--584, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. U. Dayal, M. Castellanos, A. Simitsis, and K. Wilkinson. Data integration flows for business intelligence. In Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on Extending Database Technology, St. Petersburg, Russia, Mar. 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. Deutsch, R. Hull, F. Patrizi, and V. Vianu. Automatic verification of data-centric business processes. In Proc. ICDT, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Hull et al. Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles. In Proc. Int. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM). Springer-Verlag, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. R. Hull, N. Narendra, and A. Nigam. Facilitating workflow interoperation using artifact-centric hubs. In Proc. Intl. Conf. on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. R. Hull and J. Su. Report on NSF Workshop on Data-Centric Workflows. http://dcw2009.cs.ucsb.edu/report.pdf, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. T. Jin, J. Wang, and L. Wen. Efficient retrieval of similar business process models based on structure. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS), pages 56--63. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. S. Kumaran, P. Nandi, F. F. T. H. III, K. Bhaskaran, and R. Das. Adoc-oriented programming. In SAINT, pages 334--343, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. V. Künzle and M. Reichert. PHILharmonicflows: towards a framework for object-aware process management. Journal of Software Maintenance, 23(4):205--244, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. R. Liu, R. Vaculín, Z. Shan, A. Nigam, and F. Wu. Business artifact-centric modeling for real-time performance monitoring. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Business Process Management (BPM), 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. Manyika et al. Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation, June 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Marin, R. Hull, and R. Vaculın. Data centric bpm and the emerging case management standard: A short survey. In Business Process Management Workshops, pages 24--30, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Martens, A. Slominski, G. T. Lakshmanan, and N. Mukhi. Advanced case management enabled by business provenance. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Web Services (ICWS), pages 639--641, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. A. Maté, J. Trujillo, and J. Mylopoulos. Conceptualizing and specifying key performance indicators in business strategy models. In Proc. Int. Conf. on ER, pages 282--291, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. Nigam and N. S. Caswell. Business Artifacts: An Approach to Operational Specification. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. E. H. J. Nooijen, B. F. van Dongen, and D. Fahland. Automatic discovery of data-centric and artifact-centric processes. In Proc. Int. Workshop Data- and Artifact-centric BPM (DAB), 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. M. Pesic, H. Schonenberg, and W. van der Aalst. Declare: Full support for loosely-structured processes. Proc. Conf. on EDOC, pages 287--300, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. V. Popova, D. Fahland, and M. Dumas. Artifact lifecycle discovery. CoRR, abs/1303.2554, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. G. Redding, M. Dumas, A. ter Hofstede, and A. Iordachescu. Modelling flexible processes with business objects. In Proc. 11th IEEE Intl. Conf. on Commerce and Enterprise Computing, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. M. Reichert and P. Dadam. ADEPTflex-supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inf. Syst., 10(2):93--129, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Y. Sun, W. Xu, and J. Su. Declarative choreographies for artifacts. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC), 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. K. D. Swenson. Mastering the Unpredictable: How Adaptive Case Management will Revolutionize the Way that Knowledge Workers Get Things Done. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, FL, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. R. Vaculín, R. Hull, T. Heath, C. Cochran, A. Nigam, and P. Sukavirirya. Declarative business artifact centric modeling of decision and knowledge intensive business processes. In Proc. IEEE Int. Enterprise Computing Conf. (EDOC), pages 151--160, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. R. Vaculín, R. Hull, M. Vukovic, T. Heath, N. Mills, and Y. Sun. Supporting collaborative decision processes. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Services Computing (SCC), 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. W. van der Aalst and A. ter Hofstede. YAWL: Yet another workflow language. Information Systems, 30(4):245--275, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. W. M. P. van der Aalst. Process Mining - Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. W. M. P. van der Aalst and M. Pesic. DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In Proc. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. W. Xu, J. Su, Z. Yan, J. Yang, and L. Zhang. An artifact-centric approach to dynamic modification of workflow execution. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS). 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. S. Yongchareon and C. Liu. A process view framework for artifact-centric business processes. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS), pages 26--43, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Data management perspectives on business process management: tutorial overview

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGMOD '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data
      June 2013
      1322 pages
      ISBN:9781450320375
      DOI:10.1145/2463676

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 22 June 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • tutorial

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGMOD '13 Paper Acceptance Rate76of372submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate785of4,003submissions,20%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader