Usability of Some Workflow Products in an Inter-organizational Setting

  • J. Juopperi
  • A. Lehtola
  • O. Pihlajamaa
  • A. Sladek
  • J. Veijalainen
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT)


Workflow techniques have gained plenty of attention lately as a means to support business process re-engineering. One has also argued that they are an important asset when integrating legacy systems within an organization. In the following, their applicability in an inter-organizational setting will be evaluated. This is done by grasping requirements of three different inter-organizational applications and relating them with the facilities offered by some existing workflow products, notably IBM FlowMark, Staffware, and TeamFlow. The reference architecture and terminology used in comparisons is that of the Workflow Management Coalition. The focus in this context is on specification needs deducible from the applications and the corresponding support by the products. Further point of interest is the applicability of the products as an integrating facility of legacy systems within and between organizations. A third point of interest is the support for advanced transactional properties which is of prime importance in the light of the application analysis in these environments. The overall conclusion is that the products analysed lack many of the advanced transactional features and specification facilities needed in inter-organizational environments, though some products will have more of them in their future versions.


Workflow workflow tools computer supported cooperative work business process reengineering 


  1. [ASSR93]
    M. Attie, M. Singh, A. Sheth, and M. Rusinkiewicz. Specifying and enforcing intertask dependencies. In The 19th International Conference on VLDB, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [BDS+93]
    Y. Breitbart, A. Deacon, H.-J. Schek, A. Sheth, and G. Weikum. Merging application-centric and data-centric approaches to support transaction-oriented multi-system workflows. 22 (3), September 1993.Google Scholar
  3. [CR9Oa]
    P. Chrysanthis and K Ramamritham. Acta: A framework for specifying and reasoning about transactions structure and behavior. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. [CR90b]
    P. Chrysanthis and K. Ramamrithan. A framework for specifying and reasoning about transaction structure and behavior. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [GH94]
    D. Georgakopoulos and M. F. Hornick. A framework for enforceable specification of extended transaction models and transactional workflows. International Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, sept. 1994.Google Scholar
  6. [GR93]
    J. Gray and A. Reuter. Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [Gru94]
    J. Grudin. Computer supported cooperative work: History and focus. COMPUTER, May 1994.Google Scholar
  8. [K1e91]
    J. Klein. Advanced rule driven transaction management. In IEEE COMPCON,1991.Google Scholar
  9. [Loc94]
    R. Lockwood. Groupware and workflow: the european perspective. In T.E. White and L. Fischer, editors, New tools for new times: The Workflow Paradigm, chapter 12, pages 195–214. Future Strategies Inc., Book Division, Alameda, CA, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. [PC94]
    K. Ramamritham P.K. Chrysantis. Synthesis of extended transaction models usingacta. ACM Transactions on Database system,19(3):450–491, sept. 1994.Google Scholar
  11. [SR93]
    A. Sheth and M. Rusinkiewicz. On transactional workflows. 16 (2), June 1993.Google Scholar
  12. [Tra94]
    TransCoop. Transcoop deliverable 2.1, specification language requirements. Transcoop (ep8012) deliverable, University of Twente, Dec. 1994.Google Scholar
  13. [VEH92]
    J. Veijalainen, F. Eliassen, and B. Holtkamp. The s-transaction model. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 12, pages 467–513. 1992.Google Scholar
  14. [Vei90]
    J. Veijalainen. Transaction Concepts in Autonomous Database Environments. R.Oldenbourg Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. [Vei92]
    J. Veijalainen. Issues in open edi. In Proc. of 2nd International Conference on Systems Integration, pages 401–412. IEEE Computer Society, june 1992.Google Scholar
  16. [Vei93]
    Jari Veijalainen. Heterogeneous multilevel transaction management with multiple subtransactions. In Fourth Intl. Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, DEXA ‘83, LNCS Nr. 720, pages 181–188, September 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Wäc9l]
    W. Wächter. Contracts: A means for improving reliability in distributed computing. In IEEE COMPCON, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. [Wor94]
    Workflow Management Coalition. Glossary; A Workflow Management Coalition Specification,nov. 1994.Google Scholar
  19. [WR92]
    H. Wächter and A. Reuter. The contract model. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 7. 1992.Google Scholar
  20. [WS92]
    G. Weikum and H. Schek. Concepts and applications of multilevel transactions and open nested transactions. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 13. 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Juopperi
    • 1
  • A. Lehtola
    • 1
  • O. Pihlajamaa
    • 1
  • A. Sladek
    • 1
  • J. Veijalainen
    • 1
  1. 1.VTT Information TechnologyMultimedia SystemsFinland

Personalised recommendations