Tools for Collaborative Business Process T Modeling

2010 ◽  
pp. 1643-1652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paz Perez González ◽  
Jose M. Framinan
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Computer Aided Design ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Design Tools ◽  
Collaborative Business Process ◽  
Or Organization ◽  
Aided Design ◽  
Common Understanding

A business process can be defined as a set of related tasks that are carried out within a business or organization in order to obtain certain output that should add value for the business client or organization (Gunasekaran & Kobu, 2002). An enterprise can be then analyzed and integrated through its business processes. Thus, business process modeling (BPM) becomes a fundamental part of business process management, as it enables a common understanding and analysis of a company’s business processes. Particularly, BPM using computer-aided design tools and a standard visual form of notation to describe, validate, and simulate business processes has taken on a new importance (Jonah, 2002).

Tools for Collaborative Business Process T Modeling

2010 ◽  
pp. 636-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paz Perez González ◽  
Jose M. Framinan
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Computer Aided Design ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Design Tools ◽  
Collaborative Business Process ◽  
Or Organization ◽  
Aided Design ◽  
Common Understanding

A business process can be defined as a set of related tasks that are carried out within a business or organization in order to obtain certain output that should add value for the business client or organization (Gunasekaran & Kobu, 2002). An enterprise can be then analyzed and integrated through its business processes. Thus, business process modeling (BPM) becomes a fundamental part of business process management, as it enables a common understanding and analysis of a company’s business processes. Particularly, BPM using computer-aided design tools and a standard visual form of notation to describe, validate, and simulate business processes has taken on a new importance (Jonah, 2002).

BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING AND WORKFLOW MANAGEMENT

1995 ◽  
Vol 04 (02n03) ◽  
pp. 145-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
VOLKER GRUHN
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Business Process Management ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Workflow Management ◽  
Business Process Modeling ◽  
Activity Modeling ◽  
Organization Modeling ◽  
Activity Models

Most of today’s approaches to business process engineering (also called business process management) start from an activity-centered perspective. They describe activities to be carried out within a business process and their relationships, but they usually pay little attention to the objects manipulated within processes. In this article, we discuss an approach to business process modeling, model analysis, and business process enaction (also called workflow management) which is based on data modeling, activity modeling, and organization modeling. In fact, the ℒeu approach to business process management considers data models (describing types of objects to be manipulated in a business process and their relationships), activity models (describing activities to be carried out in a business process), and organization models (describing organizational entities involved in a business process) as separate, but equally important, facets of business processes.

Semantically Enhanced Business Process Modeling Notation

2011 ◽  
pp. 259-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Witold Abramowicz ◽  
Agata Filipowska ◽  
Monika Kaczmarek ◽  
Tomasz Kaczmarek
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Business Process Modeling ◽  
Semantic Web Technologies ◽  
Enterprise Models ◽  
Semantically Enhanced ◽  
Business Process Modeling Notation

Semantic Business Process Management (SBPM) bridges the gap between business and IT by taking advantage of the Semantic Web technologies. The foundation for SBPM is the detailed ontological description of enterprise models. These models encompass also business processes taking place in enterprises. Within this chapter, we show how the process-oriented knowledge may be captured for the needs of SBPM. For this reason, we describe semantically enhanced Business Process Modeling Notation (sBPMN) being a conceptualization of one of the main process modeling notations with the fast growing popularity among the tool vendors, namely BPMN. The sBPMN ontology is based on the BPMN specification and may be used as a serialization format by the BPMN modeling tools, thus, making creation of annotations invisible to users. In this chapter, we also present an example of a process model description.

The Dichotomy of Modeling and Execution

2011 ◽  
pp. 70-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Kloppmann ◽  
Dieter Koenig ◽  
Simon Moser
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Graphical Modeling ◽  
Service Component Architecture ◽  
Component Architecture ◽  
Business Process Execution ◽  
Business Process Modeling Notation ◽  
User Tasks

This chapter introduces a set of languages intended to model and run business processes. The Business Process Modeling Notation 1.1 (BPMN) is a notation used to graphically depict business processes. BPMN is able to express choreographies, i.e. the cooperation of separate, autonomous business processes to jointly achieve a larger scenario. Since BPMN is only a notation, there is no specification for a meta-model that allows rendering BPMN choreographies into an executable form. This chapter describes how the Service Component Architecture (SCA) and the Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) help to close that gap. BPMN, SCA and WS-BPEL can jointly be used and combined to model, deploy and execute business process choreographies. We will also integrate the related BPEL4People specification, since BPMN allows human ‘user tasks’, but WS-BPEL focuses only on automated business process. The authors argue that, based on these specifications, the dichotomy between modeling and execution can be addressed efficiently. In this chapter, we will show that a key aspect of the future of Business Process Management is to combine graphical modeling (via BPMN) with a precise specification of an executable business process (via WS-BPEL and related standards).

Enterprise Specific BPM Languages and Tools

2011 ◽  
pp. 835-865
Author(s):  
Steen Brahe
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Empirical Evaluation ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Basic Model ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Code Quality ◽  
Specific Modeling

Many enterprises use their own domain concepts when they model business processes. They may also use technology in specialized ways when they implement the business processes in a Business Process Management (BPM) system. In contrast, BPM tools often provide a standard business process modeling language, a standard implementation technology and a fixed transformation that may generate the implementation from the model. This makes the tools inflexible and difficult to use. This chapter presents another approach. It applies the basic model driven development principles of direct representation and automation to BPM tools through a tool experiment in Danske Bank. We develop BPM tools that capture Danske Banks specific modeling concepts and use of technology and which automate the generation of code. An empirical evaluation reveals remarkable improvements in development productivity and code quality. We conclude that BPM tools should provide flexibility to allow customization to the specific needs of an enterprise.

Enterprise Specific BPM Languages and Tools

2010 ◽  
pp. 675-705
Author(s):  
Steen Brahe
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Empirical Evaluation ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Basic Model ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Code Quality ◽  
Specific Modeling

Many enterprises use their own domain concepts when they model business processes. They may also use technology in specialized ways when they implement the business processes in a Business Process Management (BPM) system. In contrast, BPM tools often provide a standard business process modeling language, a standard implementation technology and a fixed transformation that may generate the implementation from the model. This makes the tools inflexible and difficult to use. This chapter presents another approach. It applies the basic model driven development principles of direct representation and automation to BPM tools through a tool experiment in Danske Bank. We develop BPM tools that capture Danske Banks specific modeling concepts and use of technology and which automate the generation of code. An empirical evaluation reveals remarkable improvements in development productivity and code quality. We conclude that BPM tools should provide flexibility to allow customization to the specific needs of an enterprise.

Business Process Modeling

2012 ◽  
pp. 32-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald R. Chand ◽  
Alina M. Chircu
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Business Process Modeling ◽  
Modeling Tools ◽  
Activity Diagram ◽  
It Systems ◽  
Business Process Modeling Notation ◽  
Uml Activity Diagram

This chapter presents a variety of business process modeling notations that range from programming logic flowcharts to the new standard, BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation), as put forth by the Business Process Management Initiative (BPMI) (http://www.bpmi.org). Specifically, it discusses (1) the use of unstructured programming flowcharts in modeling business processes and their adaptation in process flow diagramming notation, (2) the UML activity diagram, and (3) BPMN, a comprehensive notation for documenting and modeling complex business processes. Using simple examples, this chapter brings out the inherent complexity of modeling business processes and the need for modeling tools that synchronize and align the mental models of business users, process analyst and information technology (IT) systems developers in order to correctly represent the intended process.

Lost in Business Process Model Translations

2011 ◽  
pp. 227-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Recker ◽  
Jan Mendling
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Modeling Languages ◽  
Seamless Integration ◽  
Complementary Nature

Often, different process models are employed in different phases of the BPM life cycle, each providing a different approach for capturing business processes. Efforts have been undertaken to overcome the disintegration of process models by providing complementary standards for design and execution. However, this claim has not yet been fulfilled. A prominent example is the seemingly complementary nature of BPMN and BPEL. The mapping between these process modeling languages is still unsolved and poses challenges to practitioners and academics. This chapter discusses the problem of translating between process modeling languages. We argue that there is conceptual mismatch between modeling languages stemming from various perspectives of the business-process management life cycle that must be identified for seamless integration. While we focus on the popular case of BPMN vs. BPEL, our approach is generic and can be utilized as a guiding framework for identifying conceptual mismatch between other process modeling languages.

FORMAL ANALYSIS OF BPMN MODELS: A NuSMV-BASED APPROACH

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (07) ◽  
pp. 987-1023 ◽  
Author(s):  
VITUS S. W. LAM
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Model ◽  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Business Process Management ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Formal Analysis ◽  
Symbolic Model ◽  
On Line ◽  
Business Process Modeling Notation

Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) plays a significant role in the specification of business processes. To ascertain the validity of BPMN models, a disciplined approach to analyze their behavior is of particular interest to the field of business process management. This paper advocates a semantics-preserving method for transforming BPMN models into New Symbolic Model Verifier (NuSMV) language as a means to verify the models. A subset of BPMN is specified rigorously in the form of a mathematical model. With this foundation in place, the translation for the subset of BPMN notational elements is then driven by a set of formally defined rules. The practicality of our approach is exemplified using an on-line flight reservation service.

Enterprise Specific BPM Languages and Tools

2010 ◽  
pp. 23-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steen Brahe
Keyword(s):  
Business Process ◽  
Process Modeling ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Business Processes ◽  
Empirical Evaluation ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Basic Model ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Code Quality ◽  
Specific Modeling

Many enterprises use their own domain concepts when they model business processes. They may also use technology in specialized ways when they implement the business processes in a Business Process Management (BPM) system. In contrast, BPM tools often provide a standard business process modeling language, a standard implementation technology and a fixed transformation that may generate the implementation from the model. This makes the tools inflexible and difficult to use. This chapter presents another approach. It applies the basic model driven development principles of direct representation and automation to BPM tools through a tool experiment in Danske Bank. We develop BPM tools that capture Danske Banks specific modeling concepts and use of technology and which automate the generation of code. An empirical evaluation reveals remarkable improvements in development productivity and code quality. We conclude that BPM tools should provide flexibility to allow customization to the specific needs of an enterprise.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document