A Framework for Selecting Workflow Tools in the Context of Composite Information Systems

  • Juan P. Carvallo
  • Xavier Franch
  • Carme Quer
  • Nuria Rodríguez
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3180)


When an organization faces the need of integrating some workflow-related activities in its information system, it becomes necessary to have at hand some well-defined informational model to be used as a framework for determining the selection criteria onto which the requirements of the organization can be mapped. Some proposals exist that provide such a framework, remarkably the WfMC reference model, but they are designed to be appl icable when workflow tools are selected independently from other software, and departing from a set of well-known requirements. Often this is not the case: workflow facilities are needed as a part of the procurement of a larger, composite information syste m and therefore the general goals of the system have to be analyzed, assigned to its individual components and further detailed. We propose in this paper the MULTSEC method in charge of analyzing the initial goals of the system, determining the types of components that form the system architecture, building quality models for each type and then mapping the goals into detailed requirements which can be measured using quality criteria. We develop in some detail the quality model (compliant with the ISO/IEC 9126-1 quality standard) for the workflow type of tools; we show how the quality model can be used to refine and clarify the requirements in order to guarantee a highly reliable selection result; and we use it to evaluate two particular workflow solutions a- ailable in the market (kept anonymous in the paper). We develop our proposal using a particular selection experience we have recently been involved in, namely the procurement of a document management subsystem to be integrated in an academic data management information system for our university.


Quality Attribute Quality Model Requirement Elicitation System Goal Document Management 
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. 1.
    Workflow Management Coalition. The Workflow Reference Model. TC00-1003 (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schuschel, H., Weske, M.: Integrated Workflow Planning and Coordination. In: Mařík, V., Štěpánková, O., Retschitzegger, W. (eds.) DEXA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2736, pp. 771–781. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shen, M., Liu, D.-R.: Coordinating Interorganizational Workflows Based on Process- Views. In: Mayr, H.C., Lazanský, J., Quirchmayr, G., Vogel, P. (eds.) DEXA 2001. LNCS, vol. 2113, p. 274. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Patel, C., Supekar, K., Lee, Y.: A QoS Oriented Framework for Adaptative Management of Web Service Based Workflows. In: Mařík, V., Štěpánková, O., Retschitzegger, W. (eds.) DEXA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2736, pp. 826–835. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cardoso, J., Sheth, A., Miller, J.: Workflow Quality of Service. In: Procs. IFIP TC5/WG5.12 Intl’ Conference on Enterprise Integration and Modeling Techniques, ICEIMT 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7. (Last accessed March 2004) A Framework for Selecting Workflow Tools
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC Standard 9126-1 Software Engineering, Part 1: Quality Model (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yu, E.: Towards Modeling and Reasoning Support for Early-Phase Requirements Engineering. In: Procs. 3rd IEEE Intl’ Symposium on Requirements Engineering, ISRE (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glass, R., Vessey, I.: Contemporary Application-Domain Taxonomies. IEEE Software 12(4) (July 1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carvallo, J.P., Franch, X., Quer, C., Torchiano, M.: Characterization of a Taxonomy for Business Applications and the Relationships among them. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on COTS-Based Software System (ICCBSS). LNCS (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Franch, X., Carvallo, J.P.: Using Quality Models in Software Package Selection. IEEE Software 20(1), 34–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fenton, N., Pfleeger, S.: Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach. PWS (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maiden, N., Ncube, C.: Acquiring Requirements for COTS Selection. IEEE Software 15(2) (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan P. Carvallo
    • 1
  • Xavier Franch
    • 1
  • Carme Quer
    • 1
  • Nuria Rodríguez
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC)Barcelona

Personalised recommendations