Generating Personalized and Certifiable Workflow Designs: A Prototype

  • Manon FrogerEmail author
  • Frederick Bénaben
  • Sébastien Truptil
  • Nicolas Boissel-Dallier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11515)


As the first level of a BPM strategy, being able to design event-oriented models of processes is a must-have competence for every modern business. Unfortunately, industrial procedures have reached a certain complexity making the designing task complex enough to discourage businesses facing the blank page. Moreover, the 21st century witnesses the emergence of myriads of norms and external regulations that businesses want to abide by. Although domain experts have a limited process modelling and norm interpretation knowledge, they know how to describe their activities and their sequencing. With progresses made in the artificial intelligence, particularly in the natural language processing domain, it becomes possible to automatize the task of creating a process in compliance with norms. This paper presents a business-oriented prototype assisting users in getting certifiable specific business processes. We detail the metamodel used to separately model norms and business’ existing procedures and then, the algorithm envisaged to deduce a corresponding cartography of processes.


Cartography generation Design compliance Workflow design Business alignment 


  1. 1.
    Baker, S.W.: Formalizing agility, part 2: how an agile organization embraced the CMMI. In: AGILE 2006 (AGILE 2006), July 2006Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw. Eng. 2013, 1–37 (2013). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Meidan, A., García-García, J.A., Escalona, M.J., Ramos, I.: A survey on business processes management suites. Comput. Stand. Interfaces. 51, 71–86 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Claes, J., Vanderfeesten, I., Pinggera, J., Reijers, H.A., Weber, B., Poels, G.: A visual analysis of the process of process modeling. Inf. Syst. E-Bus. Manag. 13, 147–190 (2015). Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Aalst, W.: Process mining: data science in action (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dumas, M., Rosa, M.L., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of business process management. Fundam. Bus. Process Manag. 1, 2 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hornung, T., Koschmider, A., Lausen, G.: Recommendation based process modeling support: method and user experience. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olivé, A. (eds.) ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 265–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benaben, F., Mu, W., Boissel-Dallier, N., Barthe-Delanoe, A.-M., Zribi, S., Pingaud, H.: Supporting interoperability of collaborative networks through engineering of a service-based Mediation Information System (MISE 2.0). Enterp. Inf. Syst., 1–27 (2014).
  9. 9.
    Vernadat, F.: Enterprise modeling and integration (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fellmann, M., Zarvic, N., Sudau, A.: Ontology-based assistance for semi-formal process modeling, pp. 117–132 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rajsiri, V., Lorré, J.-P., Benaben, F., Pingaud, H.: Knowledge-based system for collaborative process specification. Comput. Ind. 61, 161–175 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Truptil, S.: Etude de l’approche de l’interopérabilité par médiation dans le cadre d’une dynamique de collaboration appliquée à la gestion de crise (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mu, W.: Caractérisation et logique d’une situation collaborative (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montarnal, A.: Deduction of inter-organizational collaborative business processes within an enterprise social network (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    International Organization for Standardization: ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2015.
  16. 16.
    Ko, R.K.L.: A computer scientist’s introductory guide to business process management (BPM). Crossroads 15, 11–18 (2009). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., Lam, H.-P., Wynn, M.T.: Are we done with business process compliance: state of the art and challenges ahead. Knowl. Inf. Syst., 1–55 (2018). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fellmann, M., Zarvic, N., Metzger, D., Koschmider, A.: Requirements catalog for business process modeling recommender systems, pp. 393–407 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mazanek, S., Minas, M.: Business process models as a showcase for syntax-based assistance in diagram editors, pp. 322–336 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aalst, W.M.P. van der, Hofstede, A.H.M., ter Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Encycl. Database Syst., 3557–3558 (2009). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Börger, E.: Approaches to modeling business processes: a critical analysis of BPMN, workflow patterns and YAWL. Softw. Syst. Model. 11, 305–318 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koschmider, A., Hornung, T., Oberweis, A.: Recommendation-based editor for business process modeling. Data Knowl. Eng. 70, 483–503 (2011). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kluza, K., Baran, M., Bobek, S., Nalepa, G.: Overview of recommendation techniques in business process modeling. In: Proceedings 9th Workshop Knowledge Engineering and Software Engineering, KESE 9, pp. 46–57 (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fellmann, M., Koschmider, A., Schoknecht, A., Governance, C.: Analysis of business process model reuse literature: are research concepts empirically validated?, pp. 185–192 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lau, J., Iochpe, C., Thom, L., Reichert, M.: Discovery and analysis of activity pattern cooccurrences in business process models (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koschmider, A., Reijers, H.A.: Improving the process of process modelling by the use of domain process patterns. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 9, 29–57 (2013). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thom, L.: A pattern-based approach for business process modeling (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koschmider, A., Fellmann, M., Schoknecht, A., Oberweis, A.: Analysis of process model reuse: where are we now, where should we go from here? Decis. Support Syst. 66, 9–19 (2014). Scholar
  29. 29.
    R-Moreno, M.D., Borrajo, D., Meziat, D.: Process modelling and AI planning techniques: a new approach. In: Second International Workshop Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services, IIWAS 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Netjes, M., Reijers, H.A.: Supporting the full BPM life-cycle using process mining and intelligent redesign. In: Siau, K. (ed.) Contemporary Issues in Database Design and Information Systems Development, pp. 100–132 (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    El Kharbili, M., Stein, S., Markovic, I., Pulvermüller, E.: Towards a framework for semantic business process compliance management. In: Proceedings of GRCIS, vol. 2008. Citeseer (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    El Kharbili, M., Stein, S., Markovic, I., Pulvermüller, E.: Towards a framework for semantic business process compliance management. In: Proceedings GRCIS 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Elgammal, A., Turetken, O., van den Heuvel, W.-J., Papazoglou, M.: Formalizing and applying compliance patterns for business process compliance. Softw. Syst. Model. 15, 119–146 (2016). Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu, Y., Muller, S., Xu, K.: A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Syst. J. 46, 335–361 (2007). Scholar
  35. 35.
    Awad, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logic. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xu, K., Liu, Y., Wu, C.: BPSL modeler – visual notation language for intuitive business property reasoning. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 211, 211–220 (2008). Scholar
  37. 37.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sadiq, S., Governatori, G., Namiri, K.: Modeling control objectives for business process compliance. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  39. 39.
    Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z.: A formal analysis of a business contract language. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 15, 659–685 (2006). Scholar
  40. 40.
    Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Designing compliant business processes with obligations and permissions. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 5–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hinkelmann, K.: SBVR-Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules, January 2008Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Weber, I., Paik, H.-Y., Benatallah, B., Vorwerk, C., Zheng, L., Kim, S.: Personal process management: design and execution for end-users (2010)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Governatori, G.: Thou Shalt is not You Will. ArXiv14041685 Cs (2014)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mazzarese, T.: Deontic logic as logic of legal norms: two main sources of problems. Ratio Juris. 4, 374–392 (1991). Scholar
  45. 45.
    Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Declarative process modeling with business vocabulary and business rules. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4805, pp. 603–612. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  46. 46.
    van der Aalst, W., van Hee, K., van der Werf, J.M., Kumar, A., Verdonk, M.: Conceptual model for online auditing. Decis. Support Syst. 50, 636–647 (2011). Scholar
  47. 47.
    Walden, D.D., Roedler, G.J., Forsberg, K., Hamelin, R.D., Shortell, T.M.: International Council on Systems Engineering. In: Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities. Wiley, Hoboken (2015)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lin, D.: Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words. In: 17th International Conference Computational Linguistics, vol. 2 (1998)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Budanitsky, A.: Lexical semantic relatedness and its application in natural language processing (1999)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Han, X., Zhao, J.: Structural semantic relatedness: a knowledge-based method to named entity disambiguation. In: Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 50–59. Association for Computational Linguistics, Uppsala (2010)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zesch, T.: Study of semantic relatedness of words using collaboratively constructed semantic resources (2010).
  52. 52.
    Wang, T.: A study to define an automatic model transformation approach based on semantic and syntactic comparisons (2016)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Froger, M.: Comment accompagner la modélisation des processus d’une entreprise ? Ecole Nationale des Mines D’Albi (2016)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kuc, R., Rogozinski, M.: Elasticsearch Server. Packt Publishing Ltd. (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manon Froger
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Frederick Bénaben
    • 1
  • Sébastien Truptil
    • 1
  • Nicolas Boissel-Dallier
    • 2
  1. 1.Ecole des Mines d’AlbiAlbi Cedex 09France
  2. 2.IteropColomiersFrance

Personalised recommendations