Skip to main content

Comparing Business Process Variants Using Models and Event Logs

  • Conference paper
Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling (BPMDS 2014, EMMSAD 2014)

Abstract

Organizations realize that benefits can be achieved by closely working together on the design of their business processes. But even when there is a joint design for a particular business process, the way individual organizations carry out that process may differ – either wittingly or unwittingly. This paper proposes an analytical approach that helps to compare how different organizations execute essentially the same process. This comparison is based on the alignment of recorded process behavior with explicitly defined process models. The distinctive feature of the proposed approach is that it supports the comparison of the actual execution of a process within a particular organization with its intended design, as well as with the variants of that design by other organizations. In this way, organizations can develop a better understanding of how they can work together and further standardize a process of common interest. We include an industrial case study from the context of the CoSeLoG project to demonstrate the value of this comparison approach.

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

Access this chapter

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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adriansyah, A., van Dongen, B., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Conformance Checking using Cost-Based Fitness Analysis. In: Proceedings of EDOC. IEEE Computer Society (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Betz, S., Eichhorn, D., Hickl, S., Klink, S., Koschmider, A., Li, Y., Oberweis, A., Trunko, R.: 3D Representation of Business Process Models. In: MobIS (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buijs, J.C.A.M., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Towards Cross-Organizational Process Mining in Collections of Process Models and Their Executions. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2011, Part II. LNBIP, vol. 100, pp. 2–13. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Buijs, J.C.A.M., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: On the Role of Fitness, Precision, Generalization and Simplicity in Process Discovery. In: Meersman, R., et al. (eds.) OTM 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7565, pp. 305–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Esgin, E., Senkul, P.: Delta Analysis: A Hybrid Quantitative Approach for Measuring Discrepancies between Business Process Models. In: Corchado, E., Kurzyński, M., Woźniak, M. (eds.) HAIS 2011, Part I. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6678, pp. 296–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Fill, H.-G.: Using Semantically Annotated Models for Supporting Business Process Benchmarking. In: Grabis, J., Kirikova, M. (eds.) BIR 2011. LNBIP, vol. 90, pp. 29–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Friedman, T.: Welcome to the ‘Sharing Economy’ (2013), http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/opinion/sunday/friedman-welcome-to-the-sharing-economy.html (last accessed on February 19, 2014)

  8. Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Configuration and Management of Process Variants. In: Handbook on Business Process Management 1, Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Juan, Y.C., Ou-Yang, C.: A Process Logic Comparison Approach to Support Business Process Benchmarking. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 26(1-2) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kleiner, N.: Delta Analysis with Workflow Logs: Aligning Business Process Prescriptions and their Reality. Requirements Engineering 10(3) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kriglstein, S., Wallner, G., Rinderle-Ma, S.: A Visualization Approach for Difference Analysis of Process Models and Instance Traffic. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 219–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Lu, R., Sadiq, S.: Managing Process Variants as an Information Resource. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 426–431. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Lu, R., Sadiq, S.: On the Discovery of Preferred Work Practice Through Business Process Variants. In: Parent, C., Schewe, K.-D., Storey, V.C., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 2007. LNCS, vol. 4801, pp. 165–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  15. Moody, D.L.: The “physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35(6) (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Outmazgin, N.: Exploring Workaround Situations in Business Processes. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2012. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 426–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Reijers, H.A., Freytag, T., Mendling, J., Eckleder, A.: Syntax Highlighting in Business Process Models. Decision Support Systems 51(3) (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rolstadås, A.: Performance Management: A Business Process Benchmarking Approach. Chapman & Hall (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Teuteberg, F., Kluth, M., Ahlemann, F., Smolnik, S.: Semantic Process Benchmarking to Improve Process Performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal 20(4) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Verbeek, H.M.W., Buijs, J.C.A.M., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: XES, XESame, and ProM 6. In: Soffer, P., Proper, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2010. LNBIP, vol. 72, pp. 60–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Weidlich, M., Dijkman, R., Mendling, J.: The ICoP Framework: Identification of Correspondences between Process Models. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 483–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Buijs, J.C.A.M., Reijers, H.A. (2014). Comparing Business Process Variants Using Models and Event Logs. In: Bider, I., et al. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2014 2014. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 175. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43745-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43745-2_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-43744-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-43745-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics