Skip to main content

On the Suitability of Aggregated and Configurable Business Process Models

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 50))

Abstract

Reference models play an important role for specifying knowledge about a certain business domain that is general enough to be applicable for a wide set of companies. Still, it is understood that reference models need to be adapted in order to also reflect individual characteristics of a company. This adaptation turns out to be quite labor-intense. Concepts such as configurable process modeling languages have been proposed to simplify this adaptation. Competing languages have been designed to facilitate the actual act of adapting reference models, namely configurable EPCs (C-EPCs) and aggregated EPCs (aEPCs). In this paper we discuss the ease of use of these languages from an analytical perspective. Based on a mapping from C-EPCs to aEPCs we identify complexity issues and comparative advantages. It turns out that C-EPCs appear to be better suited to capture complex configuration options in a compact way.

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

Buying options

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 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Küster, J.M., Koehler, J., Ryndina, K.: Improving Business Process Models with Reference Models in Business-Driven Development. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 35–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Classification of reference models: a methodology and its application. Information Systems and E-Business Management, 35–53 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Thomas, O.: Understanding the Term Reference Model in Information Systems Research: History, Literature Analysis and Explanation. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 484–496. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Rosemann, M., Aalst, W.: A configurable reference modelling language. Inf. Syst. 32(1), 1–23 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. La Rosa, M., Marlon, D.: Configurable Process Models: How To Adopt Standard Practices In Your How Way? (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Reijers, H., Mans, R., Toorn, R.: Improved model management with aggregated business process models. Data Knowl. Eng. 68(2), 221–243 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mendling, J.: Metrics for Process Models: Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction, and Guidelines for Correctness. LNBIP, vol. 6 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Aalst, W., Dreiling, A., Gottschalk, F., Rosemann, M., Jansen-Vullers, M.: Configurable Process Models as a Basis for Reference Modeling. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 512–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kindler, E., Nüttgens, M. (eds.): Business Process Reference Models. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Business Process Reference Models, BPRM 2005 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. La Rosa, M., Aalst, W., Dumas, M., Ter hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-based variability modeling for system configuration. Software and Systems Modeling (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Aalst, W.: Formalization and Verification of EPCs (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Estublier, J., Casallas, R.: The Adele Software Configuration Manager. In: Tichy, W. (ed.) Configuration Management. Trends in software. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tryggeseth, E., Gulla, B., Conradi, R.: Modelling Systems with Variability using the PROTEUS Configuration Language. In: Estublier, J. (ed.) ICSE-WS 1993/1995 and SCM 1993/1995. LNCS, vol. 1005, pp. 216–240. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Turkay, E., Gokhale, A., Natarajan, B.: Addressing the Middleware Configuration Challenges using Model-based Techniques. In: Yoo, S., Etzkorn, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Southeast Regional Conference, pp. 166–170. ACM Press, New York (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Batory, D., Geraci, B.: Composition Validation and Subjectivity in GenVoca Generators. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(2), 67–84 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Formalizing Cardinality-Based Feature Models and Their Specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(1), 7–29 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schobbens, P.Y., Heymans, P., Trigaux, J.C.: Feature Diagrams: A Survey and a Formal Semantics. In: Glinz, M., Lutz, R. (eds.) Int. Conf. on Req. Eng., pp. 136–145 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A., Mendling, J., Gottschalk, F.: Beyond Control-Flow: Extending Business Process Configuration to Roles and Objects. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olivé, A. (eds.) ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 199–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Dreiling, A., Knackstedt, R., Kuropka, D.: Configurative Process Modeling – Outlining an Approach to increased Business Process Model Usability. In: Khosrow-Pour, M. (ed.) Proceedings of the 14th Information Resources Management Association International Conference, pp. 615–619. IRM Press (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Delfmann, P.: Adaptive Referenzmodellierung. Methodische Konzepte zur Konstruktion und Anwendung wiederverwendungsorientierter Informationsmodelle. Logos (2006) (in German)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Delfmann, P., Janiesch, C., Knackstedt, R., Rieke, T., Seidel, S.: Towards Tool Support for Configurative Reference Modeling – Experiences from a Meta Modeling Teaching Case. In: Brockmans, S., Jung, J., Sure, Y. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Meta-Modelling. LNI, vol. 96, pp. 61–83 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Puhlmann, F., Schnieders, A., Weiland, J., Weske, M.: Variability mechanisms for process models. PESOA-Report 17/2005, Hasso-Plattner-Institut (June 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schnieders, A., Puhlmann, F.: Variability Mechanisms in E-Business Process Families. In: Abramowicz, W., Mayr, H. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Business Information Systems. LNI, vol. 85, pp. 583–601 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Razavian, M., Khosravi, R.: Modeling Variability in Business Process Models Using UML. In: Latifi, S. (ed.) Proceedings of ITGN 2008, pp. 82–87 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Reinhartz-Berger, I., Soffer, P., Sturm, A.: A domain engineering approach to specifying and applying reference models. In: Desel, J., Frank, U. (eds.) EMISA 2005. LNI, vol. 75, pp. 50–63 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Czarnecki, K., Antkiewicz, M.: Mapping Features to Models: A Template Approach Based on Superimposed Variants. In: Glück, R., Lowry, M.R. (eds.) Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. on Generative Programming and Component Eng., pp. 422–437 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gottschalk, F., Aalst, W., Jansen-Vullers, M.: Configurable Process Models – A Foundational Approach. In: Becker, J., Delfmann, P. (eds.) Reference Modeling, pp. 59–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Gottschalk, F., Aalst, W., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable workflow models. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 17(2), 177–221 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Aalst, W., Basten, T.: Inheritance of Workflows: An Approach to Tackling Problems Related to Change. Theoretical Computer Science 270(1-2), 125–203 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Aalst, W., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F., Hofstede, A., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J.: Correctness-preserving configuration of business process models. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Inverardi, P. (eds.) FASE 2008. LNCS, vol. 4961, pp. 46–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Aalst, W., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F., Hofstede, A., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J.: Preserving correctness during business process model configuration. Formal Aspects of Computing, 1–24 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baier, T., Pascalau, E., Mendling, J. (2010). On the Suitability of Aggregated and Configurable Business Process Models. In: Bider, I., et al. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2010 2010. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 50. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13051-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13051-9_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13050-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13051-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics