Abstract
Change propagation has been identified as major concern for process collaborations during the last years. Although changes might become necessary for various reasons, they can often not be kept local, i.e., at one partner’s side, but must be partly or entirely propagated to one or several other partners. Due to the autonomy of partners in a collaboration, change effects cannot be imposed on the partners, but must be agreed upon in a consensual way. In our model of this collective decision process, we assume that each partner that becomes involved in a negotiation has different alternatives on how a change may be realized, and evaluates these alternatives according to his or her individual costs and benefits (utilities). This paper presents models from group decision making that can be applied for handling change negotiations in process collaborations in an efficient and fair way. The theoretical models are evaluated based on a proof-of-concept prototype that integrates an existing implementation for change propagation in process collaborations with change alternatives, utility functions, and group decision models. Based on simulating a realistic setting, the validity of the approach is shown. Our prototype supports the selection of change alternatives for each partner during negotiation that depending on the group decision model used, provides solutions emphasizing efficiency and/or fairness.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arrow, K.J.: Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edn. Yale University Press, New Haven (1963)
Barros, A., Dumas, M., Oaks, P.: Standards for web service choreography and orchestration: status and perspectives. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 61–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Benyoucef, M., Rinderle, S.: Modeling e-negotiation processes for a service oriented architecture. Group Decision and Negotiation 15(5), 449–467 (2006)
Bertsimas, D., Farias, V.F., Trichakis, N.: On the efficiency-fairness trade-off. Management Science 58(12), 2234–2250 (2012)
Dyer, J.S., Sarin, R.K.: Group preference aggregation rules based on strength of preference. Management Science 25, 822–832 (1979)
Fdhila, W., Indiono, C., Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: Dealing with change in process choreographies: Design and implementation of propagation algorithms. Information Systems 49, 1–24 (2015)
Fdhila, W., Knuplesch, D., Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: Change and compliance in collaborative processes. In: Services Computing. IEEE (2015)
Fdhila, W., Rinderle-Ma, S., Indiono, C.: Memetic algorithms for mining change logs in process choreographies. In: Franch, X., Ghose, A.K., Lewis, G.A., Bhiri, S. (eds.) ICSOC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8831, pp. 47–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Grossmann, G., Mafazi, S., Mayer, W., Schrefl, M., Stumptner, M.: Change propagation and conflict resolution for the co-evolution of business processes. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 24(01) (2015)
Hani, A.F.M., Paputungan, I.V., Hassan, M.F.: Renegotiation in service level agreement management for a cloud-based system. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 47(3), 51 (2015)
Kalai, E., Smorodinsky, M.: Other solutions to Nash’s bargaining problem. Econometrica 43(3), 513–518 (1975)
Keeney, R.L.: Foundations for group decision analysis. Decision Analysis 10(2), 103–120 (2013)
Keeney, R.L., Kirkwood, C.W.: Group decision making using cardinal social welfare functions. Management Science 22, 430–437 (1975)
Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. J. Wiley & Sons, New York (1976)
Konow, J.: Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. Journal of Economic Literature 41, 1188–1239 (2003)
Livne, Z.A.: Axiomatic charaterizations of the Raiffa and the Kalai-Smorodinsky solutions to the bargaining problem. Operations Research 37(6), 972–980 (1989)
Ludwig, H., Keller, A., Dan, A., King, R., Franck, R.: A service level agreement language for dynamic electronic services. Electronic Commerce Research 3(1–2), 43–59 (2003)
Nash, J.F.: The bargaining problem. Econometrica 18(2), 155–162 (1950)
Papazoglou, M.: Web services: principles and technology. Pearson Education (2008)
Paurobally, S., Tamma, V., Wooldridge, M.: A framework for web service negotiation. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS) 2(4), 14 (2007)
Ponnalagu, K., Narendra, N.C., Ghose, A., Chiktey, N., Tamilselvam, S.: Goal oriented variability modeling in service-based business processes. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 499–506. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Rachmilevitch, S.: The Nash solution is more utilitarian than egalitarian. Theory and Decision, pp. 1–16 (2014)
Roman, D., Keller, U., Lausen, H., de Bruijn, J., Lara, R., Stollberg, M., Polleres, A., Feier, C., Bussler, C., Fensel, D., et al.: Web service modeling ontology. Applied ontology 1(1), 77–106 (2005)
Sarabando, P., Dias, L.C., Vetschera, R.: Mediation with incomplete information: Approaches to suggest potential agreements. Group Decision and Negotiation 22(3), 561–597 (2013)
Schulte, S., Schuller, D., Steinmetz, R., Abels, S.: Plug-and-play virtual factories. IEEE Internet Computing 5, 78–82 (2012)
Traverso, P., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Marconi, A., Kazhamiakin, R., Lucchese, P., Busetta, P., Bertoli, P.: Supporting the negotiation between global and local business requirements in service oriented development. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Service Oriented Computing, New York, USA (2004)
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Inheritance of interorganizational workflows: How to agree to disagree without loosing control? Information Technology and Management 4(4), 345–389 (2003)
Weske, M.: Business process management: concepts, languages, architectures. Springer Science & Business Media (2012)
Zukerman, M., Mammadov, M., Tan, L., Ouveysi, I., Andrew, L.L.H.: To be fair or efficient or a bit of both. Computers and Operations Research 35, 3787–3806 (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fdhila, W., Indiono, C., Rinderle-Ma, S., Vetschera, R. (2015). Finding Collective Decisions: Change Negotiation in Collaborative Business Processes. In: Debruyne, C., et al. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2015 Conferences. OTM 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9415. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26148-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26148-5_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26147-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26148-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)