Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Software and Systems Modeling
Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling 3/2015

01.07.2015 | Special Section Paper

Design science in action: developing a modeling technique for eliciting requirements on business process management (BPM) tools

verfasst von: Ilia Bider, Erik Perjons

Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling | Ausgabe 3/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Selecting a suitable business process management (BPM) tool to build a business process support system for a particular business process is difficult. There are a number of BPM tools on the market that are available as systems to install locally and as services in the cloud. These tools are based on different BPM paradigms (e.g., workflow or case management) and provide different capabilities (e.g., enforcement of the control flow, shared spaces, or a collaborative environment). This makes it difficult for an organization to select a tool that would fit the business processes at hand. The paper suggests a solution for this problem. The core of the solution is a modeling technique for business processes for eliciting their requirements for a suitable BPM tool. It produces a high-level, business process model, called a “step-relationship” model that depicts the essential characteristics of a process in a paradigm-independent way. The solution presented in this paper has been developed based on the paradigm of design science research, and the paper discusses the research project from the design science perspective. The solution has been applied in two case studies in order to demonstrate its feasibility.
Vorheriger Artikel KIPO: the knowledge-intensive process ontology
Nächster Artikel Localized model transformations for building large-scale transformations

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
Note that the step-relationship model suggested in this paper has no direct connection to the models used in our BPS systems, and the modeling techniques used in iPB.
 
2
The basis for the definitions in this section is a systems-oriented view of business processes presented in [10].
 
3
The dichotomy type/instance is accepted in all dialects of the BPM literature. However, different terms can be used to express this dichotomy. For example “process” itself can be used to refer to the type, while case or run is used to denote the instance. Another term that is used to denote the type is process model, which is typical for an operational view. We have chosen to use the terms “type” and “instance” as they suit both our pragmatic and theoretical definition better.
 
4
See a similar discussion about work systems in [3].
 
5
The simplified software development process from Fig. 1 is used only as an illustration for the concepts being developed in the paper. We are not suggesting and/or arguing for/against any particular method of software system development.
 
6
In this paper, we use the term hypothesis in its general meaning: “a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation” (Oxford dictionaries: http://​oxforddictionari​es.​com). Our usage of this term bares no connotation as to how it is used in positivists’ research methods.
 
7
This space includes all past, present, and possible future situation, problems, and solutions. Using orthogonal spaces in Fig. 3 is a simplification that is made in order to use relatively simple pictures to illustrate the basic concepts. In reality, the spaces are neither orthogonal, nor do they have a real metric to measure the distance between the points. For details, see [12, 13].
 
8
The idea corresponds to Ronald Giere’s consideration of theories being like maps [24].
 
9
A shared space is an information space that can be accessed by multiple users, such as a blog, wiki or a personal journal. A process shared space is an information space that supports communication/collaboration of process participants in the frame of a process instance.
 
10
This paper is not aimed at evaluating or promoting iPB. A short description of the iPB project is included with the aim of demonstrating the DSR approach used in this research, more exactly to show how the research was initiated by a problem in IbisSoft. For the scope of this paper, it is enough to underline that iPB does not belong to the mainstream paradigm of workflow thinking, which created difficulties for its promotion. This, in turn, gave an impulse for finding a generic solution for this kind of problem. Note also that the process model built in iPB has no resemblance to the one suggested in this paper.
 
11
For the time being, IbisSoft has postponed promotion of iPB, using it only as an internal tool. This required us to seek other test cases for the evaluation of our suggestions (see the right-hand side of Fig. 4).
 
12
We plan to publish the result of this analysis separately as a part of our continuing work on the solution outlined in this paper.
 
13
A more realistic example of software development is presented in Sect. 8.2.
 
14
The term capability here is understood as ability to provide support for certain aspect of running business process instances.
 
15
Which would satisfy [18] requirement on modeling: “Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful,” p. 424.
 
Literatur
1.
2.
3.
Alter, S.: Work system theory: overview of core concepts, extensions, and challenges for the future. JAIS 14(2), 72–121 (2013)
4.
Anderson, J., Donnellan, B., Hevner, A.R.: Exploring the Relationship between Design Science Research and Innovation: A Case Study of Innovation at Chevron, Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer, Berlin (2011)
5.
Andersson, T., Bider, I., Svensson, R.: Aligning people to business processes experience report. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 10(4), 403–413 (2005)CrossRef
6.
Anttila, J., Jussila, K.: An advanced insight into managing business processes in practice. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 24(8), 918–932 (2013)CrossRef
7.
8.
Baresi, L., Casati, F., Castano, S., Fugini, M.G., Mirbel, I., Pernici, B.: Workflow design methodology. In: Grefen, P., Pernici, B., Sanchez, G. (eds.) Database Support for Workflow Management: The WIDE Project, pp. 47–94, Kluwer (1999)
9.
Baskerville, R.L., Pries-Heje, J., Venable, J.: Soft Design Science Methodology, DERIST 2009, ACM, pp. 1–11 (2009)
10.
Bider, I., Bellinger, G., Perjons, E.: Modeling an agile enterprise: reconciling systems and process thinking. In: Johannesson, P., Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A. (eds.) The Practice of Enterprise Modelling, IFIP, LNBIP, vol. 92, pp. 238–252, Springer, Berlin (2011a)
11.
Bider, I., Johannesson, P., Schmidt, R.: Experiences of using different communication styles in business process support systems with the shared spaces architecture, Proceedings of CAiSE 2011, LNCS, Vol. 6741, pp. 299–313, Springer, Berlin, (2011b)
12.
Bider, I., Johannesson, P., Perjons, E.: Design science research as movement between individual and generic situation-problem-solution spaces. In: Baskerville, R., De Marco, M., Spagnoletti, P. (eds.) Organizational Systems. An Interdisciplinary Discourse, pp. 35–61. Springer, Berlin (2013a)
13.
Bider, I., Karapantelakis, A., Khadka, N.: Building a high-level process model for soliciting requirements on software tools to support software development: experience report. PoEM 2013 (Short Papers). CEUR 1023, 70–82 (2013)
14.
Bider I., Perjons E., Johannesson P.: In Search of the Holy Grail: Integrating social Software with BPM. Experience Report. LNBIP, No 50, pp 1–13, Springer, Berlin (2010)
15.
Bider, I., Perjons, E.: Evaluating adequacy of business process modeling approaches. Handb. Res. Complex Dyn. Process Manag. Techn. Adapt. Turbul. Environ., IGI, 79–102 (2009)
16.
Bider, I., Perjons E.: Preparing for the Era of Cloud Computing: Towards a Framework for Selecting Business Process Support Services. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, LNBIP, No 113, pp. 16–30, Springer, Berlin (2012)
17.
Bider, I., Perjons, E., Riaz Dar, Z.: Using Data-Centric Business Process Modeling for Discovering Requirements for Business Process Support Systems: Experience Report. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, LNBIP 147, pp. 63–77, Springer, Berlin (2013c)
18.
Box, G.E.P., Draper, N.R.: Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces. Wiley, New York (1987)MATH
19.
20.
Cohn, D., Hull, R.: Business artifacts: a data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 3–9 (2009)
21.
Duarte Filho, N. F., Costa, N. P.: A set of requirements for business process management suite (BPMS). In: Advances in Information Systems and Technologies, pp. 487–496, Springer, Berlin (2013)
22.
FIPS: Standard for integration definition for function modeling (IDEF0). National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). FIPS publication, p. 183 (1993)
23.
24.
Giere, R.: Scientific Perspectivism. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2010)
25.
Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation: A manifesto for Business Revolution, Harper Business, New York (1993)
26.
Hant, V.D.: Process Mapping: How to Reengineer Your Business Processes. Wiley, New York (1996)
27.
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)
28.
29.
Khan, R.: Evaluating BPM software. Bus. Integr. J. October issue (2003)
30.
Khomyakov M., Bider, I.: Achieving Workflow Flexibility through Taming the Chaos, OOIS 2000–6th international conference on object oriented information systems, pp. 85–92, Springer, Berlin (2000)
31.
Kleiner, N.: The focus of requirements engineering in workflow application development. CEUR Workshops Proc. 75, 372–377 (2003)
32.
Link, E.: Diffusion Dynamics and Pricing of Innovations. Lund University Press, Lund (1997)
33.
Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Data-Driven Modeling and Coordination of Large Process Structures. In OTM2007, PartI, LNCS 4803. pp. 131–49, Springer, Berlin (2007)
34.
Neuman, W.L.: Social Research Methods. Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sixth Edition, Peason (2006)
35.
Österle, H., Becker, J., Frank, U., Hess, T., Karagiannis, D., Krcmar, H., Loos, P., Mertens, P., Oberweis, A., Sinz, E.J.: Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 20(1), 7–10 (2010)CrossRef
36.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24(3), 45–78 (2007)CrossRef
37.
38.
Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York (1962)
39.
40.
Sein, M.K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Lindgren, R.: Action design research. MIS Q. 35(1), 37–56 (2011)
41.
42.
Swenson, K.D. (ed.): Mastering the Unpredictable: How Adaptive Case Management Will Revolutionize the Way That Knowledge Workers Get Things Done. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa (2010)
43.
Van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl. Eng. 53(2), 129–162 (2005)CrossRef
44.
Van der Aalst, W.M.P., Van, Hee K.M.: Workflow Management: Models, Methods and Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)
45.
Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer (2007)
46.
Wieringa, R.J.: Design science as nested problem solving. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, ACM, Philadelphia, pp. 1–12 (2009)
47.
Wohed, P., Andersson, B., Johannesson, P.: Open source workflow systems, Mod. Bus. Process Automa. 401–434 (2010)
Metadaten
Titel
Design science in action: developing a modeling technique for eliciting requirements on business process management (BPM) tools
verfasst von
Ilia Bider
Erik Perjons
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Software and Systems Modeling / Ausgabe 3/2015
Print ISSN: 1619-1366
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-1374
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0412-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2015

Software and Systems Modeling 3/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Regular Paper

An interactive tool for UML class model evolution in database applications

Editorial

Editorial for the SoSyM issue 2015/03

Regular Paper

Localized model transformations for building large-scale transformations

Special Section Paper

Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models

Special Section Paper

Querying process models by behavior inclusion

Regular Paper

Converting metamodels to graph grammars: doing without advanced graph grammar features

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise