Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Declarative Process Modelling Languages from the Organisational Perspective

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Business Process Management Workshops (BPM 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 256))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The spectrum of business processes can be divided into two types: well-structured routine processes and agile processes with control flow that evolves at run time. In a similar way, two different representational paradigms can be distinguished: procedural models and declarative models which define rules that a process has to satisfy. Agile processes can often be captured more easily using a declarative approach. While in procedural languages the organisational perspective can be modelled adequatly, in declarative languages, however, an adequate representation of organisational patterns is often still not possible. Agile processes, however, need to explicitly integrate organisational coherencies due to the importance of human decision-making. This paper presents a review of declarative modeling languages, outlines missing aspects and suggests research roadmaps for the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dumas, M., Rosa, M.L., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Jablonski, S.: MOBILE: A modular workflow model and architecture. In: Working Conference on Dynamic Modelling and Information Systems (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  3. van der Aalst, W., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Comput. Sci. Res. Dev. 23(2), 99–113 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pichler, P., Weber, B., Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.: Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: An empirical investigation. Business Process Management Workshops, pp. 383–394 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vaculín, R., Hull, R., Heath, T., Cochran, C., Nigam, A., Sukaviriya, P.: Declarative business artifact centric modeling of decision and knowledge intensive business processes. In: Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC), no. Edoc, pp. 151–160 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow management: modeling concepts. architecture and implementation (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cabanillas, C., Resinas, M., del Río-Ortega, A., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Specification and automated design-time analysis of the business process human resource perspective. Inf. Syst. 52, 55–82 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Van der Aalst, W.M., Ter Hofstede, A.H.: Yawl: yet another workflow language. Inf. Syst. 30(4), 245–275 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cabanillas, C., Knuplesch, D., Resinas, M., Reichert, M., Mendling, J., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: RALph: a graphical notation for resource assignments in business processes. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 53–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Van der Aalst, W.M., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl. Eng. 53(2), 129–162 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zeising, M., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Towards a common platform for the support of routine and agile business processes. In: Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Object Management Group (OMG). Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN), Version 1.0 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D.: Workflow resource patterns: identification, representation and tool support. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 216–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Vaculin, R., Hull, R., Vukovic, M., Heath, T., Mills, N., Sun, Y.: Supporting collaborative decision processes. In: International Conference on Services Computing, pp. 651–658 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schönig, S., Cabanillas, C., Jablonski, S., Mendling, J.: Mining the organisational perspective in agile business processes. In: Gaaloul, K., Schmidt, R., Nurcan, S., Guerreiro, S., Ma, Q. (eds.) BPMDS 2015 and EMMSAD 2015. LNBIP, vol. 214, pp. 37–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T., Zanitti, F.: Contracts for cross-organizational workflows as timed dynamic condition response graphs. J. Logic Algebraic Program. 82(5), 164–185 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Declarative process modeling with business vocabulary and business rules. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM-WS 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4805, pp. 603–612. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. De Giacomo, G., Dumas, M., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M.: Declarative process modeling in bpmn, In press (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Westergaard, M., Slaats, T.: Mixing paradigms for more comprehensible models. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 283–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. 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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Hull, R., Damaggio, E., Fournier, F., Gupta, M., Heath III, F.T., Hobson, S., Linehan, M., Maradugu, S., Nigam, A., Sukaviriya, P., Vaculin, R.: Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles. In: Bravetti, M. (ed.) WS-FM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6551, pp. 1–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Bussler, C.: Organisationsverwaltung in Workflow-Management-Systemen. Dt. Univ.-Verlag (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Goedertier, S.: Declarative techniques for modeling and mining business processes. Ph.D. thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Whittle, J., Hutchinson, J., Rouncefield, M.: The state of practice in model-driven engineering. Softw. IEEE 31(3), 79–85 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Semmelrodt, F., Knuplesch, D., Reichert, M.: Modeling the resource perspective of business process compliance rules with the extended compliance rule graph. In: Bider, I., Gaaloul, K., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, H.A., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPMDS 2014 and EMMSAD 2014. LNBIP, vol. 175, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstraße 30, 95447, Bayreuth, Germany

    Stefan Schönig & Stefan Jablonski

Authors
  1. Stefan Schönig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Jablonski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Schönig .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Databases and Information Systems, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Manfred Reichert

  2. Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hajo A. Reijers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Schönig, S., Jablonski, S. (2016). Comparing Declarative Process Modelling Languages from the Organisational Perspective. In: Reichert, M., Reijers, H. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2016. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 256. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42887-1_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42887-1_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42886-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42887-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation