Elsevier

Decision Support Systems

Volume 54, Issue 1, December 2012, Pages 345-361
Decision Support Systems

Visual support for work assignment in process-aware information systems: Framework formalisation and implementation

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.042Get rights and content

Abstract

Process-aware information systems, ranging from generic workflow systems to dedicated enterprise information systems, use work-lists to offer so-called work items to users.

In real scenarios, users can be confronted with a very large number of work items that stem from multiple cases of different processes. In this jungle of work items, users may find it hard to choose the right item to work on next. The system cannot autonomously decide which is the right work item, since the decision is also dependent on conditions that are somehow outside the system. For instance, what is “best” for an organisation should be mediated with what is “best” for its employees.

Current work-list handlers show work items as a simple sorted list and therefore do not provide much decision support for choosing the right work item. Since the work-list handler is the dominant interface between the system and its users, it is worthwhile to provide an intuitive graphical interface that uses contextual information about work items and users to provide suggestions about prioritisation of work items. This paper uses the so-called map metaphor to visualise work items and resources (e.g., users) in a sophisticated manner. Moreover, based on distance notions, the work-list handler can suggest the next work item by considering different perspectives. For example, urgent work items of a type that suits the user may be highlighted.

The underlying map and distance notions may be of a geographical nature (e.g., a map of a city or office building), but may also be based on process designs, organisational structures, social networks, due dates, calendars, etc. The framework proposed in this paper is generic and can be applied to any process-aware information system. Moreover, in order to show its practical feasibility, the paper discusses a full-fledged implementation developed in the context of the open-source workflow environment YAWL, together with two real examples stemming from two very different scenarios. The results of an initial usability evaluation of the implementation are also presented, which provide a first indication of the validity of the approach.

Highlights

► Process management systems present work items as lists with no context information. ► Lack of context information makes it hard for users to choose the next item to work on. ► We developed a tool to suggest how to prioritise work, using context information. ► Context information is provided by projecting the current states on process maps. ► We have performed experiments with users and proven the approach validity.

Introduction

Process-aware information systems (PAISs) [14] are frequently applied in a variety of intra- and inter-organisational settings. Examples of such systems are workflow management systems, business process management systems, enterprise resource management systems (like SAP R/3), and e-business systems. Initially, these systems were mainly used to support administrative processes inside large organisations. Later their application was extended to cross-organisational processes. A PAIS is a special case of information system, as defined in [3], in that it is driven by some process model. The model may be implicit or hidden, but the system supports the handling of cases in some (semi-) structured form. PAISs also have in common that they offer work to resources (typically people). The elementary pieces of work are called work items, e.g., “Approve travel request XYZ1234”. These work items are offered to the users via a so-called work-list handler. This system component takes care of work distribution and authorisation issues. Typically, PAISs use a pull mechanism, i.e., work is offered to all resources that qualify and the first resource to select the work item will be the only one responsible for its execution. To provide decision support to users in choosing the right work items in the right order, basic information is provided, e.g., task name, due date, etc. However, given the fact that the work-list is the dominant interface the PAIS uses to interact with its users, it seems important to provide decision support that goes beyond a sorted list of items. If work items are selected by less qualified users than necessary or if users select items in a non-optimal order, then the performance of the overall process is hampered. Hence, we propose to use richer interfaces that exploit contextual information.

In most organisations, where multiple resources have overlapping roles and authorisations and there is often a backlog of work, users will choose the next work item to perform by considering many aspects of the execution context. For instance, the choice could be driven by work items that should be completed more urgently as they may expire soon, or users may choose to perform those work items that should be executed closer to the physical location where they are positioned. Many other approaches are conceivable which may or may not depend on the specific application domain.

To our knowledge, commercial as well as open source PAISs present work-lists simply as a list of work items, each with a short textual description. Some products sort the work items in a work-list using a certain priority scheme specified at design time and not updatable at run time. This approach is very similar to mail agents that list email in an inbox and allow them to be sorted based on simple criteria. No information is given about the context in which those emails were received, thus providing little or no decision support when selecting the next email to process.

To better support users in learning the execution context and determining the most opportune subsequent work items, we introduce the metaphor of maps. A map may be a geographical map (e.g., the map of a university's campus), but any other type of map may be used, e.g., process schemas, organisational diagrams, Gantt charts, etc. Work items can be visualised by dots on the map. By not fixing the type of map, but allowing this choice to be configurable, different types of relationships can be shown, thus providing a deeper insight into the context of the work to be performed.

Our work-list handler provides functionalities similar to those found in car navigation systems. Such systems provide a suggestion for the best route to a certain destination, letting the driver decide the actual route she/he prefers to take. Similarly, our work-list handler simply suggests the most appropriate work item(s), but users are free to choose any as next to work on.

Moreover, on some maps, resources may also be shown, e.g., to reflect the geographical position of users. Besides the map metaphor we also use the distance metaphor. Seen from the viewpoint of a particular resource, some work items are close while others are further away. This distance may be geographic, e.g., a field service engineer may be far away from a malfunctioning printer at the other side of the campus. However, many other distance metrics are possible. For example, one can support metrics capturing familiarity with certain types of work, levels of urgency, and organisational distance.

Comparing again with car navigation systems, such systems can be configured to suggest a route that takes less time, fewer kilometres or that is cheaper (e.g., toll-free) to drive. Here, similarly, users can customise the most suitable/preferred distance metric.

It should be noted that the choice of metric is orthogonal to the choice of map thus providing a high degree of flexibility in context visualisation. Resources could, for example, see a geographical map where work items, whose positions are calculated based on a function supplied at design time, display their level of urgency. In this paper, we propose different types of maps and distance metrics. The framework has been fully implemented and integrated in YAWL,2 an open source workflow management system based on the so-called workflow patterns [26], [28]. However, the framework and its implementation are constructed in such a way that it can easily be combined with other PAISs having the concept of work-list. Note that not only workflow systems provide work-lists; case handling systems, enterprise resource planning systems, call centre systems, etc. also provide such work-lists.

This paper extends the work reported in [10] in the following ways: (i) the initial proof-of-concept implementation has become a full-fledged plug-in for YAWL; (ii) better insight has been given in the intent of the various metrics; (iii) some metrics not formalised in [10] have been added; (iv) we have conducted empirical tests with 16 subjects, which have provided a first indication that the metaphor is clearly understandable by users and that our framework improves the efficiency of the work performed by process participants; and (v) additional related work is discussed and compared with our work. In addition, we have introduced several new screen shots that, on the one hand, show the actual integration with YAWL, and, on the other hand, show new maps that extend the initial example of emergency management. Finally, a new second example is provided that concerns a more classical business scenario. Many of the new illustrated maps could not be designed with the previous version of the environment reported in [10]; in fact, the implementation itself has been significantly extended as to support more complex XQueries.

The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 discusses related research: on the one hand, it positions this research work in the field of Information and Decision Support Systems; on the other hand, it covers the state of the art in work-list and process visualisation in PAISs, both in research and in practice. To this end, this section discusses a number of research papers and systems related to the visualisation aspects of context-aware systems. It also reports on some tools that provide user-friendly interfaces to execute queries over databases and data streams. Section 3 provides a detailed overview of the general framework. Section 4 focusses on the implementation of the framework and highlights some design choices in relation to user and system interfaces. In Section 5 the framework is illustrated through two examples. Section 6 reports the empirical tests conducted to provide an indication that the examples proposed are actually workable and draws some conclusions and lessons learned from the tests' outcomes. Section 7 summarises the contributions of the paper and outlines avenues for future work aimed at improving the implementation of the framework.

Section snippets

Related work

The analysis of the related literature has been carried out along two main orthogonal directions. Section 2.1 positions our work in the field of Information and Decision Support Systems, whereas Section 2.2 discusses the state of the art of visualisation, with special focus on business process management.

The general framework

The core of the proposed visualisation framework is based on a two-layer approach: (i) maps and (ii) the visualisation of work items based on a distance notion. A work item is represented as a dot positioned along certain coordinates on a background map. A map is meant to capture a particular perspective of the context of the process. Since a work item can be associated with several perspectives, it can be visualised in several maps (at different positions). Maps can be designed as needed. When

Implementation

The general framework described in the previous section has been operationalised through the development of a component that can be plugged into the YAWL system [26]. The YAWL environment is an open source process-aware information system which is based on the workflow patterns9 and uses a service-oriented architecture. The YAWL engine and all other services (work-list handler, web-service broker, exception handler, etc.) communicate through XML messages over HTTP. The

Two running examples

In this section we illustrate a number of features of the visualisation framework by considering two example scenarios. The first scenario concerns the management of the aftermath of an emergency (e.g., an earthquake), where teams are sent to the affected area to make an assessment and provide first support to victims. Team members are equipped with a laptop and their work is coordinated through the use of a PAIS and some external applications.

The second scenario is more business oriented and

System evaluation

The previous sections have introduced the problem of supporting work assignment and proposed a system to address it. Section 5 has discussed two running examples to illustrate the practical feasibility of the approach.

This section is intended to go beyond the simple proof that the system can actually be built and to focus on its evaluation with end users. In particular, it reports on the outcomes of a set of empirical tests conducted to verify whether the metaphor is understandable by users and

Conclusions

In this paper a general visualisation framework is presented that can aid users in selecting the right work item to work on next among a potentially large number of work items offered to them. The framework uses the map metaphor to show the locations of work items and resources. A distance metaphor is used to show which work items are “close” (e.g., urgent, similar to earlier work items, or geographically close). Both concepts are orthogonal and this provides a great deal of flexibility when it

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Francesco Cardi and Giancarlo La Medica, former students of the Faculty of Computer Engineering, who contributed with their theses work to the development of the Visualisation Applet and the Visualisation Designer, respectively. Massimiliano also gratefully acknowledges Massimo Mecella, assistant professor at Department of Computer Science and Engineering of SAPIENZA — Università di Roma, for having opened the door to the two students to focus their theses on the

Dr Massimiliano de Leoni is a post-doctoral researcher at Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, The Netherlands (TU/e). Previously, he performed post-doctoral research at SAPIENZA — Università di Rome, after earning a Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering there. He has also spent 6 months with the Business Process Management Group at Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, and made a short visit to the Intelligent Agents group at RMIT University in Melbourne.

References (30)

  • E. Bonabeau

    Decisions 2.0: the power of collective intelligence

    MIT Sloan Management Review

    (2009)
  • R. Brown et al.

    Multi-faceted visualisation of worklists

    Journal on Data Semantics

    (2009)
  • M. de Leoni et al.

    Visual support for work assignment in process-aware information systems

  • A.R. Dennis et al.

    Information technology to support electronic meetings

    Management Information Systems Quarterly

    (1988)
  • S.R. Diasio et al.

    The evolution of expertise in decision support technologies: a challenge for organizations

  • Cited by (30)

    • ProcessProfiler3D: A visualisation framework for log-based process performance comparison

      2017, Decision Support Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      Information systems nowadays are designed to automatically capture process related data, such as activities, time stamps, resources and contextual information (e.g. customer details, case-specific data) [1], which has enabled the application of process mining techniques to obtain indicators of organisational performance from such data. In addition to academic interest in this topic [6–9], there are currently over 20 commercial process mining tools that include performance analysis features [1], mostly comparable to the features provided by Disco [10]. Most of these techniques analyse a single dimension of a business process at a time.

    • A framework for efficiently mining the organisational perspective of business processes

      2016, Decision Support Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      Various algorithms are available to discover models capturing the control-flow of a process, related to the behavioural perspective of the process [2, 3]. For perspectives like the organisational perspective, which manages the involvement of human resources in processes, only partial solutions for mining have been developed despite the importance of resource information not only for performance but also for compliance analysis [4–7]. The need to better support the organisational perspective was evidenced by previous approaches that mined this perspective [8–13].

    • A recommendation system for predicting risks across multiple business process instances

      2015, Decision Support Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      The validity of the metaphors of maps and metrics used for decision support in process execution was confirmed through a set of experiments reported in [31]. De Leoni et al. [31] only define very basic metrics. We have extended the repertoire of these metrics with a new metric that is computed by employing the technique described in Section 7.

    • A Generic Approach Towards Location-Aware Business Process Execution

      2023, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Dr Massimiliano de Leoni is a post-doctoral researcher at Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, The Netherlands (TU/e). Previously, he performed post-doctoral research at SAPIENZA — Università di Rome, after earning a Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering there. He has also spent 6 months with the Business Process Management Group at Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, and made a short visit to the Intelligent Agents group at RMIT University in Melbourne.

    Dr Michael Adams is a Senior Lecturer in the Information Systems School, Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, and is a member of the Business Process Management Discipline there.

    Prof. dr. ir. Wil van der Aalst is a full professor of Information Systems at the Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (TU/e). He is also an adjunct professor at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). His research interests include workflow management, process mining, Petri nets, business process management, process modelling, and process analysis. He is an elected member of the Royal Holland Society of Sciences and Humanities (Koninklijke Hollandsche Maatschappij der Wetenschappen) and the Academy of Europe (Academia Europaea).

    Prof. Arthur ter Hofstede is a Professor in the Information Systems School in the Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, and is Head of the Business Process Management Discipline. He is also a Professor in the Information Systems Group at Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. His main research interests lie in the area of business process automation.

    1

    Though he is currently working at Eindhoven University of Technology, the work of Dr. de Leoni was mainly conducted when he was affiliated with SAPIENZA — Università di Roma.

    View full text