Creating and Updating Personalized and Verbalized Business Process Descriptions

  • Jens Kolb
  • Henrik Leopold
  • Jan Mendling
  • Manfred Reichert
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 165)


The increasing adoption of process-aware information systems (PAISs) has resulted in large process model collections. To support users having different perspectives on complex processes and related data, a PAIS should enable personalized process views, i.e., user-specific abstractions of process models. Despite the abstraction achieved through views of the graphical process models, many end users still struggle with understanding these graphical models and their details. For selected user groups, therefore, a PAIS should provide verbalized process descriptions describing their role in the process. Existing PAISs neither provide mechanisms for managing process views nor verbalized process descriptions. While process views have been used as visual abstractions for large process models, so far no work exists on how to provide both personalized and verbalized process descriptions based on respective views. This paper presents an approach for creating such personalized and verbalized process descriptions based on process views. Furthermore, textual changes of a personalized and verbalized process description are correctly mapped to corresponding updates of the underlying process model. In this context, all other views and process descriptions related to this process model are migrated to the new version of the process model as well. Overall, our approach enables end users to understand and evolve large process models based on personalized and verbalized process descriptions.


process model abstraction updatable process view process change natural language process visualization human-centered processes 


  1. 1.
    Weber, B., Sadiq, S., Reichert, M.: Beyond Rigidity - Dynamic Process Lifecycle Support: A Survey on Dynamic Changes in Process-Aware Information Systems. Computer Science - Research and Development 23(2), 47–65 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosemann, M.: Potential Pitfalls of Process Modeling: Part A. Business Process Management Journal 12(2), 249–254 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Refactoring Large Process Model Repositories. Computers in Industry 62(5), 467–486 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Streit, A., Pham, B., Brown, R.: Visualization Support for Managing Large Business Process Specifications. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 205–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kolb, J., Reichert, M.: Data Flow Abstractions and Adaptations through Updatable Process Views. In: Proc 27th Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2013), Coimbra, Portugal, pp. 1447–1453 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kabicher-Fuchs, S., Rinderle-Ma, S., Recker, J., Indulska, M., Charoy, F., Christiaanse, R., Dunkl, R., Grambow, G., Kolb, J., Leopold, H., Mendling, J.: Human-Centric Process-Aware Information Systems (HC-PAIS). CoRR abs/1211.4 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tran, H.: View-Based and Model-Driven Approach for Process-Driven, Service-Oriented Architectures. TU Wien, Dissertation (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bobrik, R., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Proviado – Personalized and Configurable Visualizations of Business Processes. In: Bauknecht, K., Pröll, B., Werthner, H. (eds.) EC-Web 2006. LNCS, vol. 4082, pp. 61–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiu, D.K., Cheung, S., Till, S., Karlapalem, K., Li, Q., Kafeza, E.: Workflow View Driven Cross-Organizational Interoperability in a Web Service Environment. Inf. Techn. and Mgmt. 5(3&4), 221–250 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leopold, H., Mendling, J., Polyvyanyy, A.: Generating Natural Language Texts from Business Process Models. In: Ralyté, J., Franch, X., Brinkkemper, S., Wrycza, S. (eds.) CAiSE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7328, pp. 64–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems - Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kolb, J., Reichert, M.: Supporting Business and IT through Updatable Process Views: The proView Demonstrator. In: Ghose, A., Zhu, H., Yu, Q., Delis, A., Sheng, Q.Z., Perrin, O., Wang, J., Wang, Y. (eds.) ICSOC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7759, pp. 460–464. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    La Rosa, M., Wohed, P., Mendling, J., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Managing Process Model Complexity Via Abstract Syntax Modifications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 7(4), 614–629 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mendling, J., Strembeck, M.: Influence Factors of Understanding Business Process Models. In: Proc. BIS 2008, pp. 142–153 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kolb, J., Reichert, M.: A Flexible Approach for Abstracting and Personalizing Large Business Process. ACM Applied Computing Review 13(1) (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reichert, M., Kolb, J., Bobrik, R., Bauer, T.: Enabling Personalized Visualization of Large Business Processes through Parameterizable Views. In: Proc. 26th Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2012), Riva del Garda, Trento, Italy, pp. 1653–1660 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kolb, J., Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Using Concurrent Task Trees for Stakeholder-centered Modeling and Visualization of Business Processes. In: Oppl, S., Fleischmann, A. (eds.) S-BPM ONE 2012. CCIS, vol. 284, pp. 237–251. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lanz, A., Kolb, J., Reichert, M.: Enabling Personalized Process Schedules with Time-Aware Process Views. In: Franch, X., Soffer, P. (eds.) CAiSE Workshops 2013. LNBIP, vol. 148, pp. 205–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kolb, J., Hübner, P., Reichert, M.: Automatically Generating and Updating User Interface Components in Process-Aware Information Systems. In: Proc. 10th Int’l Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS 2012), pp. 444–454 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kolb, J., Rudner, B., Reichert, M.: Towards Gesture-based Process Modeling on Multi-Touch Devices. In: Proc. 1st Int’l Workshop on Human-Centric Process-Aware Information Systems (HC-PAIS 2012), Gdansk, Poland, pp. 280–293 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: On the Refactoring of Activity Labels in Business Process Models. Information Systems 37(5), 443–459 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Polyvyanyy, A., Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H.: Simplified Computation and Generalization of the Refined Process Structure Tree. In: Bravetti, M. (ed.) WS-FM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6551, pp. 25–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mel’cuk, I., Polguère, A.: A Formal Lexicon in the Meaning-Text Theory (or How to Do Lexica with Words). Computational Linguistics 13(3-4), 261–275 (1987)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lavoie, B., Rambow, O.: A Fast and Portable Realizer for Text Generation Systems. In: Applied Natural Language Processing, ACL, pp. 265–268 (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle, S.: Change Patterns and Change Support Features - Enhancing Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. Data & Knowledge Engineering 66(3), 438–466 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Klein, D., Manning, C.D.: Accurate Unlexicalized Parsing. In: 41st Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 423–430 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kolb, J., Kammerer, K., Reichert, M.: Updatable Process Views for User-Centered Adaption of Large Process Models. In: Liu, C., Ludwig, H., Toumani, F., Yu, Q. (eds.) ICSOC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7636, pp. 484–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kolb, J., Kammerer, K., Reichert, M.: Updatable Process Views for Adapting Large Process Models: The proView Demonstrator. In: Proc. of the Business Process Management 2012 Demonstration Track, Tallinn, Estonia (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goldberg, E., Driedger, N., Kittredge, R.: Using Natural-Language Processing to Produce Weather Forecasts. IEEE Expert 9(2), 45–53 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McKeown, K., Kukich, K., Shaw, J.: Practical Issues in Automatic Documentation Generation. In: Applied Natural Language Processing, ACL, pp. 7–14 (1994)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lavoie, B., Rambow, O., Reiter, E.: The ModelExplainer. In: Proceedings 8th Int’l Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pp. 9–12 (1996)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Meziane, F., Athanasakis, N., Ananiadou, S.: Generating Natural Language Specifications from UML Class Diagrams. Requirements Engineering 13, 1–18 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Cardoso, J.: What Makes Process Models Understandable? In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Recker, J.: Activity Labeling in Process Modeling: Empirical Insights and Recommendations. Information Systems 35(4), 467–482 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ottensooser, A., Fekete, A., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Menictas, C.: Making Sense of Business Process Descriptions: An Experimental Comparison of Graphical and Textual Notations. Journal of Systems and Software (2012) (to appear)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mayer, R.E.: Multimedia Learning. 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hipp, M., Michelberger, B., Mutschler, B., Reichert, M.: A Framework for the Intelligent Delivery and User-Adequate Visualization of Process Information. In: Proc. 28th Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2013), Coimbra, Portugal (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., Weske, M.: The Triconnected Abstraction of Process Models. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 229–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Smirnov, S., Reijers, H.A., Weske, M.: A Semantic Approach for Business Process Model Abstraction. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) CAiSE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6741, pp. 497–511. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Shan, Z., Yang, Y., Li, Q., Luo, Y., Peng, Z.: A Light-Weighted Approach to Workflow View Implementation. In: Zhou, X., Li, J., Shen, H.T., Kitsuregawa, M., Zhang, Y. (eds.) APWeb 2006. LNCS, vol. 3841, pp. 1059–1070. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schumm, D., Latuske, G., Leymann, F., Mietzner, R., Scheibler, T.: State Propagation for Business Process Monitoring on Different Levels of Abstraction. In: Proc. 19th ECIS, Helsinki, Finland (2011)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex - Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Inf. Sys. 10(2), 93–129 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Flexible Support of Team Processes by Adaptive Workflow Systems. Distributed and Par. Databases 16(1), 91–116 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens Kolb
    • 1
  • Henrik Leopold
    • 2
  • Jan Mendling
    • 3
  • Manfred Reichert
    • 1
  1. 1.Ulm UniversityGermany
  2. 2.Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Wirtschaftsuniversität WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations