The Integration of Functional Decomposition with UML Notation in Business Process Modelling

  • Adam Przybyłek
Conference paper

Over the past decade business and software modelling have been carried out using different notations designed to fit the special needs of the respective tasks. This approach has introduced a gap between the software and business models, which has resulted in inconsistency. The objective of this paper is to propose a new approach to analysis of the business process using UML notation. UML is the most commonly used language in object-oriented software development. Moreover, it can be extended to the modelling of business processes. With this approach it is possible, in the same notation, to visualise a company’s business processes, its information system requirements and the architecture of the relevant information system.


Business Process Unify Modelling Language Object Constraint Language Activity Diagram Business Process Modelling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baker B (2001) Business Modeling with UML: The Light at the End of the Tunnel. Rational SoftwareGoogle Scholar
  2. Booch G, Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I (1998) The Unified Modeling Language User Guide, Addison WesleyGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruno G, Torchiano M, Agarwal R (2002) UML Enterprise Instance Models. CIT 2002Google Scholar
  4. Castela N, Tribolet J, Silva A, Guerra A (2001) Business process modeling with UML. ICEIS 2001, pp 679-685Google Scholar
  5. Desfray P (2004) Making a success of preliminary analysis using UML, Softeam Dewalt C (1999) Business process modeling with UML. Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Eertink H, Janssen WPM, Oude Luttighuis PHWM, Teeuw WB, Vissers CA (1999) A Business Process Design Language. Lecture Notes In Computer Science, vol 1708, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  7. Eriksson HE, Penker M (2000) Business Modeling with UML: Business Patterns at Work. John Wiley & Sons, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Eriksson HE, Penker M, Lyons B, Fado D (2004) UML 2 Toolkit. Wiley Publishing, Inc., USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Fowler M, Scott K (1999) UML Distilled  A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language. 2nd ed., Reading, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Frost S, Allen P (1996) Business Process Modeling, SELECT Software Tools plc, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  11. Harel D, Politi M (1998) Modeling Reactive Systems with Statecharts. McGrawHill, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. Havey M (2005) Essential Business Process Modeling. O’Reilly, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. IBM Corporation (1996) Business Process Reengineering and Beyond, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  14. Loos P, Fettke P (2001) Towards an Integration of Business Process Modeling and ObjectOriented Software Development. Chemnitz Univeristy of Technology, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  15. May M (2003) Business Process Management. Pearson Education Limited, Great BritainGoogle Scholar
  16. McLeod G (1998) Extending UML for Enterprise and Business Process Modeling. UML’98  Beyond the Notation, First International Workshop, pp 195-204Google Scholar
  17. Odeh M, Beeson I, Green S, Sa J (2002) Modelling Processes Using RAD and UML Activity Diagrams: an Exploratory Study. ACIT 2002Google Scholar
  18. Omar A, Sawy EL (2001) Redesigning Enterprise for eBusiness, McGrawHillGoogle Scholar
  19. Ovidiu SN (2000) Business Modeling: UML vs. IDEF. Griffith UniversityGoogle Scholar
  20. Pender T (2003) UML Bible. John Wiley & Sons, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. Podeswa H (2005) UML for the IT Business Analyst: A Practical Guide to ObjectOriented Requirements Gathering. Thomson Course Technology PTR, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  22. Sinogas P, Vasconcelos A, Caetano A, Neves J, Mendes R, Tribolet J (2001) Business processes extensions to UML profile for business modeling, Centro de Engenharia Organizacional, Lisbona. ICEIS 2001, pp 673-678Google Scholar
  23. Sparks G (2000) An Introduction to UML: The Business Process Model. SparxGoogle Scholar
  24. Ståhl H, Jankko T, Oittinen P (2002) Modelling of publishing processing with UML. Helsinki University of Technology, Department of Automation and System Technology, Laboratory of Media Technology, Finland UML 2.0Google Scholar
  25. Superstructure Specification (2003) Object Management Group, Inc.Google Scholar
  26. Wrycza S, Marcinkowski B (2005) UML 2 Teaching at Postgraduate Studies Prerequisites and Practice, The Proceedings of ISECON 2005, vol 22, New OrleanGoogle Scholar
  27. Wrycza S, Marcinkowski B (2005) Interaction Occurrences and Combined Fragments in System Dynamics Modelling with UML 2 Sequence Diagram art. (w:) (ed.) Nilsson G., Gustas R., Wojtkowski W., Wojtkowski G., Wrycza S., Zupancic J., ISD 2005 Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on ISD, Karlstad University Studies, Karlstad, pp 59-68Google Scholar
  28. Wrycza S, Marcinkowski B, Wyrzykowski K (2005) UML 2.0 in information systems modelling. Helion, WarsawGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Przybyłek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsGdańsk UniversityPoland

Personalised recommendations