Basic notions regarding business processes and supporting information systems

Dietz, Jan L. G.; Albani, Antonia

doi:10.1007/s00766-005-0002-9

Cited by 45 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, such a distinction is problematic (see, for example, Regev & Wegmann, 2004;Dietz, 2004). This observation is also supported by the results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A sociotechnical approach towards alignment

Taxén

2005

Softw Process Imprv Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In order to manage the complexity of the alignment problem we introduce the construct of workpractices as the main unit of analysis. A workpractice is a meaningful, goal oriented social entity where some actors produce a result that other actors need. The development of products or services provided by an organization is accomplished by coordinating the results of cooperating workpractices. Alignment is achieved by either adjusting the coordination between workpractices or adjusting internal workpractice elements such as processes and support systems. To make this approach operational, we suggest structuring a workpractice according to the Activity Domain Theory -a new theory for coordinating human activity. In this theory, particular emphasis is placed on the achievement of shared understanding among the actors. Some results from applying this approach in the Ericsson telecommunication company are discussed. The findings indicate that the proposed approach is a promising way towards achieving and maintaining alignment.

show abstract

“…However, such a distinction is problematic (see, for example, Regev & Wegmann, 2004;Dietz, 2004). This observation is also supported by the results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A sociotechnical approach towards alignment

Taxén

2005

Softw Process Imprv Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, most process modeling languages do not employ a goal construct as an integral part of the model. This is sometimes justified by viewing these models as an "internal" view of a process, focusing on how the process is performed and externalizing what the process is intended to accomplish in the goal [5]. In contrast, intention-oriented process modeling focuses on what the process is intended to achieve, thus providing the rationale of the process, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining Intention-Oriented and State-Based Process Modeling

Soffer

Rolland

2005

Conceptual Modeling – ER 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Business process modeling and design has gained importance in recent years. Consequently, a large number of modeling languages have emerged. Many of them lack formality, whereas some others support the verification of the designed process. Most of existing modeling languages adopt an operational view focusing on how the process is performed. By contrast, others follow the human intention of achieving a goal as the force that drives the process, and concentrate on what the process must do, i.e. on its rationale. The aim of this paper is to combine intention-oriented modeling with formal statebased modeling and achieve their synergy, benefiting from the advantages of both. We use the Map formalism as an example of the former and the Generic Process Model (GPM) as an example of the latter. The paper proposes a procedure for converting a Map into GPM concepts, illustrates it with the SAP Material Management Module and shows the benefits resulting from it.

show abstract

“…Other methods exist to graphically model systems. Examples of these methods are Archimate [9], Demo [2], OPM [3], and SSM [1]. The originality of SEAM is the combination of GST and of RM-ODP.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%