Abstract
Business process design and governance are two important phases of Business Process Management (BPM). They are however usually performed using tools that tend to be too generic and technical for most business analysts. For instance, they promote Business Intelligence (BI) mechanisms to extract reports for the analysis of the executed processes, but they typically focus on one process definition at a time. This approach has shortcomings in organisations where there are large collections of processes that need to be managed consistently. In previous work, we proposed the generation of domain-specific studios, in order to enable analysts to design their processes in a much more intuitive way than with generic languages. This work is a logical continuation through the addition of domain-specific multi-process reporting and analysis. By defining analytics metrics in a domain-specific space, analysts are able to make business performance reviews and manage change in ways that apply directly and quickly to entire collections of process. The appropriateness and the feasibility of the approach are shown through a detailed use-case and a complete prototype implementation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
van der Aa, H., Leopold, H., Reijers, H.A.: Dealing with behavioral ambiguity in textual process descriptions. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 271–288. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_16
van der Aalst, W.M.: Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw. Eng. 2013, 37 (2013). Article ID 507984. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/507984
Dijkman, R.M., La Rosa, M., Reijers, H.A.: Managing large collections of business process models-current techniques and challenges. Comput. Ind. 63(2), 91–97 (2012)
Eclipse-Fundation: Business Intelligence and Reporting Tools (BIRT) Project (2004). http://www.eclipse.org/birt/
Eclipse-Fundation: Xtext (2006). http://www.eclipse.org/Xtext/
Eclipse-Fundation: Sirius (2007). http://www.eclipse.org/sirius/
Eclipse-Fundation: Mangrove (2009). https://www.eclipse.org/mangrove/
Jablonski, S., Volz, B., Dornstauder, S.: Evolution of business process models and languages. In: 2nd International Conference on Business Process and Services Computing (BPSC), pp. 46–59. Citeseer (2009)
Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: On the refactoring of activity labels in business process models. Inf. Syst. 37(5), 443–459 (2012)
Mernik, M., Heering, J., Sloane, A.M.: When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 37(4), 316–344 (2005)
Milani, F., Dumas, M., Ahmed, N., Matulevičius, R.: Modelling families of business process variants: a decomposition driven method. Inf. Syst. 56, 55–72 (2016)
Mos, A.: Domain specific monitoring of business processes using concept probes. In: Toumani, F., et al. (eds.) ICSOC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8954, pp. 213–224. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-22885-3_19
Mos, A., Cortes-Cornax, M.: Business matter experts do matter: a model-driven approach for domain specific process design and monitoring. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNBIP, vol. 260, pp. 210–226. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45468-9_13
Mos, A., Cortes-Cornax, M.: Generating domain-specific process studios. In: 20th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC), pp. 1–10. IEEE (2016)
Mos, A., Jacquin, T.: A platform-independent mechanism for deployment of business processes using abstract services. In: 17th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW), pp. 71–78. IEEE (2013)
OMG: Business process model and notation (BPMN) version 2.0 (2011). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0
Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Weber, B., Fahland, D., Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How the structuring of domain knowledge helps casual process modelers. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds.) ER 2010. LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 445–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16373-9_33
Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part a. Bus. Process Manage. J. 12(2), 249–254 (2006)
Rosemann, M., Brocke, J.: The six core elements of business process management. In: Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. IHIS, pp. 105–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-45100-3_5
Silver, B.: BPMN Method and Style: A Levels-Based Methodology for BPM Process Modeling and Improvement Using BPMN 2.0. Cody-Cassidy Press, USA (2009)
Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Merks, E., Paternostro, M.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework. Pearson Education, USA (2008)
Weber, B., Reichert, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Refactoring large process model repositories. Comput. Ind. 62(5), 467–486 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cortes-Cornax, M., Mos, A. (2017). Multi-process Reporting and Analysis for Change Management and Performance Reviews. In: Abramowicz, W. (eds) Business Information Systems. BIS 2017. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 288. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59336-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59336-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59335-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-59336-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)