Towards Customer-Individual Configurations of Business Process Models

  • Michael Becker
  • Stephan Klingner
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 113)


Nowadays business process models are a common approach to describe and analyse existing business processes and to create new processes in a structured way. However, with growing complexity of process models there is a lack of comprehensibility. Using existing notations, it is challenging or even impossible to define temporal and logical constraints between process steps that are not directly connected. We demonstrate a declarative approach for representing business processes that allows for configuration, i.e. selection of process steps, based on a component representation. In addition, we present ways to transform a configuration into a procedural process model using BPMN.


Business Process Configuration Service Modelling Modularisation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Böttcher, M., Klingner, S.: The basics and applications of service modeling. In: SRII Global Conference 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becker, M., Klingner, S.: Formale Modellierung von Komponenten und Abhängigkeiten zur Konfiguration von Product-Service-Systems. To Appear in: Diensleistungsmodellierung 2012 (March 2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., Linden, F., Lauenroth, K., Pohl, K.: Principles of Variability. In: Software Product Line Engineering, pp. 57–88. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker, M.: Formales Metamodell für Dienstleistungskomponenten. Technical report, Universität Leipzig (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heiskala, M., Paloheimo, K.S., Tiihonen, J.: Mass Customization of Services: Benefits and Challenges of Configurable Services. In: Frontiers of e-Business Research (FeBR 2005), Tampere, Finland, pp. 206–221 (September 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thum, T., Batory, D., Kastner, C.: Reasoning about edits to feature models. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2009, pp. 254–264. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    van den Broek, P., Galvão, I., Noppen, J.: Elimination of constraints from feature trees. In: Thiel, S., Pohl, K. (eds.) Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Software Product Lines, SPLC 2008, Limerick, Ireland, September 8-12, vol. 2(Workshops), pp. 227–232 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gil, Y., Kremer-Davidson, S., Maman, I.: Sans Constraints? Feature Diagrams vs. Feature Models. In: Bosch, J., Lee, J. (eds.) SPLC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6287, pp. 271–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van der Aalst, W., Pesic, M.: Specifying, Discovering, and Monitoring Service Flows: Making Web Services Process-Aware. BPM Center Report BPM-06-09, (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sistla, A.P., Clarke, E.M.: The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics. J. ACM 32, 733–749 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tiihonen, J., Soininen, T., Niemelä, Sulonen, R.: A practical tool for mass-customising configurable products. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, pp. 1290–1299 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grosskopf, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: The Process: Business Process Modeling Using BPMN, 1 edn. Meghan Kiffer Pr, Tampa (March 2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.: A configurable reference modelling language. Information Systems 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montero, I., Pena, J., Ruiz-Cortes, A.: Representing runtime variability in business-driven development systems. In: International Conference on Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS)-Based Software Systems, vol. 1, p. 241 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rogge-Solti, A., Kunze, M., Awad, A., Weske, M.: Business process configuration wizard and consistency checker for bpmn 2.0. In: Halpin, T., Nurcan, S., Krogstie, J., Soffer, P., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Bider, I., Aalst, W., Mylopoulos, J., Rosemann, M., Shaw, M.J., Szyperski, C. (eds.) BPMDS 2011 and EMMSAD 2011. LNBIP, vol. 81, pp. 231–245. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Santos, E., Pimentel, J., Castro, J., Sánchez, J., Pastor, O.: Configuring the Variability of Business Process Models Using Non-Functional Requirements. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Ukor, R. (eds.) BPMDS 2010 and EMMSAD 2010. LNBIP, vol. 50, pp. 274–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Batory, D.: Feature Models, Grammars, and Propositional Formulas. In: Obbink, H., Pohl, K. (eds.) SPLC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3714, pp. 7–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    La Rosa, M., Gottschalk, F., Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Linking Domain Models and Process Models for Reference Model Configuration. In: ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Benatallah, B., Paik, H.-Y. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2007. LNCS, vol. 4928, pp. 417–430. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Soffer, P., Yehezkel, T.: A State-Based Context-Aware Declarative Process Model. In: Halpin, T., Nurcan, S., Krogstie, J., Soffer, P., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Bider, I. (eds.) BPMDS 2011 and EMMSAD 2011. LNBIP, vol. 81, pp. 148–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lanz, A., Weber, B., Reichert, M.: Workflow Time Patterns for Process-Aware Information Systems. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Ukor, R. (eds.) BPMDS 2010 and EMMSAD 2010. LNBIP, vol. 50, pp. 94–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Becker, M., Klingner, S., Böttcher, M.: Configuring services regarding service environment and productivity indicators. In: 2011 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), pp. 505–512 (September 2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Böttcher, M., Klingner, S.: Providing a Method for Composing Modular B2B-Services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 26(5), 320–331 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Curran, T., Keller, G., Ladd, A.: SAP R/3 business blueprint: understanding the business process reference model. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Klingner, S., Böttcher, M., Becker, M., Döhler, A.: Managing complex service portfolios. In: Ganz, W., Kicherer, F., Schletz, A. (eds.) RESER 2011 Productivity of Services NextGen - Beyond Output/Input (September 2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L., Dijkman, R.: Similarity Search of Business Process Models. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 32(3), 23–28 (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.: Workflow Patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14, 5–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Becker
    • 1
  • Stephan Klingner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Business Information SystemsUniversity of LeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations