2010
DOI: 10.1007/s11761-010-0065-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A flexible, object-centric approach for business process modelling

Abstract: Mainstream business process modelling techniques often promote a design paradigm wherein the activities that may be performed within a case, together with their usual execution order, form the backbone on top of which other aspects are anchored. This Fordist paradigm, while effective in standardised and production-oriented domains, breaks when confronted with processes in which case-bycase variations and exceptions are the norm. We contend that the effective design of flexible processes calls for a substantial… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, each object also has a lifecycle, including its initial state, its final state, and possible transitions (through service calls to the object) that move the object from one state to another. XFlows [12], object-centric process modeling [20], and object lifecycle compliant processes [11] are the approaches in this category. Where the former uses the object lifecycle model to derive a classical, data-dependent activity-centric process model, the latter allows for the definition of both the object lifecycle model and the activity-centric process model, while ensuring that they comply with each other.…”
Section: Data Integrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, each object also has a lifecycle, including its initial state, its final state, and possible transitions (through service calls to the object) that move the object from one state to another. XFlows [12], object-centric process modeling [20], and object lifecycle compliant processes [11] are the approaches in this category. Where the former uses the object lifecycle model to derive a classical, data-dependent activity-centric process model, the latter allows for the definition of both the object lifecycle model and the activity-centric process model, while ensuring that they comply with each other.…”
Section: Data Integrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [21], process execution and object interaction are derived from a product data model. CorePro [14], the Object-Process Methodology [8], Object-Centric Process Modeling [18], and the Artifact-Centric approach [6] define processes in terms of object life cycles with various kinds of object interaction. Only artifacts support all notions of variable granularity (12), though it is given in a declarative form that cannot always be realized [7].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, to enable consistency between process and object states, extensions of these approaches based on object life cycles have been proposed. These extensions include object life cycle compliance [21], object-centric process models [9,8], business artifacts [4,22], data-driven process coordination [5,23], and product-based workflows [24,6]. However, none of these approaches explicitly maps states to object attribute values.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this context, different authors state that many deficiencies of contemporary process management systems (PrMS) can be traced back to the missing integration of processes and data [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. Although processes and data seem to be closely related, a unified understanding of the inherent relationships existing between them is still missing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%