Stewart Green

Linking Business Processes and Information Systems Provision in a Dynamic Environment

This paper discusses decision and communication processes which link strategic activity in a business with information systems development activity. We develop a model which illustrates these processes as observed in one company (AXA Sun Life, Bristol HQ), but we suggest there may be generalizable features. We use Role Activity Diagrams as our diagramming method.In most organizations it is impractical to achieve a fully articulated business model and IS architecture. Organizations do try to make development (or acquisition) of information systems which will serve business needs as orderly as they can, in circumstances which are inherently complex and unstable. We suggest that the degree of regularity which is achieved in IS development within the business context comes not so much from following one overarching plan, as from a continuous process of adjustment, in which local short-term plans are weighed against current understanding of the businesss key interests. What is needed to aid this process is a general framework of communication and decision making within which plans can be reviewed and modified in the light of changing circumstances. This paper presents an attempt to reveal and represent such a framework.

A framework for classifying and evaluating process architecture methods

Piecemeal identification, development, and support of an organisations processes may lead to problems: first, it may be difficult to identify which processes should be supported, and, second, it is unlikely that processes developed piecemeal will either optimise the achievement of an organisations objectives, or work well together. One solution involves identifying and modelling an organisations process architecture, and then using it to develop and subsequently support the constituent processes. However, this solution leads to a new challenge: a number of different types of process architecture method have been proposed, but it is not clear which should be used in a given situation. To address this challenge, the article outlines a framework for classifying, evaluating, and comparing process architectures. Following the work of Rolland et al.(1998), the proposed framework considers process architecture methods from four different views: contents, form, purpose, and lifecycle. To partially validate the framework, it was used to classify and evaluate Riva (Ould 2005), a particular process architecture method. The result of this application of the framework suggests how it might be refined. It could then be used for comparing other process architecture methods. Such a comparative analysis should help practitioners choose between process architecture methods. Copyright

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SUPPORT FOR REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING

Approaches to providing knowledge-based support for the process of requirements engineering are discussed. The kinds of knowledge commonly used in providing such support are placed within a taxonomy and the approaches of different projects to the definition and representation of each of these kinds of knowledge are considered. Finally, there is a brief review of the ways in which each kind of knowledge is used in various approaches to providing support for commonly recognized stages in the process of requirements engineering. It is concluded that knowledge-based techniques are at present capable of providing significant support for the requirements engineer, but that a considerable amount of work has still to be done before the potential of these techniques can be fully realized.

Comparative process architectures in two higher education institutions

Enterprises are increasingly organising their activities and IT support around key business processes. These processes and their interrelationships may be identified in a process architecture. Ould (2005) claims that the Riva method identifies the process architecture that an organisation should have, and asserts that organisations in the same business have the same process architecture. This assertion is not self-evidently true, and it has not been corroborated by the literature. But it is an important claim: if true, then process architectures could be reused either for new process development, or for appraising an organisation’s existing architecture. We assessed the assertion by comparing the process architectures produced by applying Riva to two higher education institutions. The results partially support the view that an essential process architecture underpins higher education institutions, and also that for regulated business domains the optimal process architecture may be one based upon designed as well as essential business entities. The conclusion is that process architecture reuse, with its attendant potential savings of time and money, is worth investigating further, even though the extent to which the invariant assertion is testable may not be clear yet.

Reusable process architectures and process models: an experience report from higher education

We apply a particular process architecture development method, Riva, to a study and comparison of specimen processes in two UK higher education institutions. We developed an outline process architecture for one common area of activity (development and delivery of taught programmes), then drew role activity diagrams for two selected processes at both institutions, in order to compare them. We found considerable variation at the concrete level even in these similar organisations, but saw more commonality when we developed abstract models using only core elements. Though even the abstract models were not identical, there was enough similarity to suggest some potential for reuse of process designs between organisations. Such designs may usefully serve as examples, to be copied, modified or extended as locally appropriate. It might be useful to build repositories of process models and architectures, for use by organisations in the same business sector.

Business processes and support systems: design for flexibility

Stewart Green , Gil Regev , Pnina Soffer and Jelena Zdravkovic 1 Faculty of Computing Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK 2 Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), School of Computer and Communication Sciences, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland 3 MIS Department, Haifa University, Carmel Mountain 31905 Haifa, Israel 4 Department of Computer Science, Royal University of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

Special issue on modelling organisational processes

There is a growing interest in process modelling, which arises out of a convergence between attempts to model and design businesses and attempts to model and design software. Business modelling has tended to be high level and prescriptive, seeking strategic levers for rendering a business more effective—particularly, though not solely, with regard to its use of IT. Business models are generally couched in relatively ordinary language and simple diagrams. Software modelling has a long history in structured programming and analysis, and is used not only for designing systems but for testing or proving them. Software models have tended to be much lower level, and couched in specific diagrammatic notations and formal languages. The move into the middle ground between these two distinctive areas has been prompted by a growing need to connect business processes with the IT processes which supposedly support and enable them. The move has been led, at least in this country, by the software engineering community, prompted by a realisation that modelling techniques being employed to design information systems were focused at too low a level, on the detailed flows and processing of data rather than on regular business activity as such. One consequence over time of a persistent focus on low-level data processing has been an accumulation of legacy systems which hold back business development or growth. Thus, the EPSRC’s SEBPC programme (‘Systems Engineering for Business Process Change’) has as its objective: ‘to release the full potential of IT as an enabler of business process change, and to overcome the disabling effects which the build-up of legacy systems has on such change’. More generally, research groups have been looking to find ways of generalising or lifting process modelling away from data flows and processes towards business processes conceived as regular patterns of activity and interaction among a network of roles or actors. Furthermore, some groups are seeking not only to model actual or ideal business processes in a descriptive and static fashion, but to find ways of building models which track or lead business process change dynamically, or which can themselves be executed, in the shape of an automated or partially automated (e.g. workflow) system. One example of this kind of research is that being done at Manchester [3]. The interest in business process modelling is now also being reflected in the literature on the business side, fuelled by the rapid spread and irresistibly universalising claims of such modelling approaches as Unified Modelling Language (UML) and Extensible Markup Language (XML). Business Process Modelling Language (BPML) is introduced in one of the papers in this volume, and Paul Harmon’s recent book [2] gives a good overview of business perspectives on process change. As a research area, process modelling is an exciting, formative stage. Perhaps it currently ranges too widely across a spectrum which links business process improvement to program specification, and will settle down into a number of more clearcut initiatives. But it is certainly true that the coming together of formerly separate research interests sets the stage for deep and often controversial engagement over the modelling and implementation of complex processes.

Addressing the Paradigmatic Limitation of Conventional Business Process Management Concepts by Proposing New Definitions

Considering the history of the formation of the business process management discipline and its concept definitions, and by looking at organisations as social systems, it can be demonstrated that conventional business process management practices can be associated with the functionalist social paradigm and therefore are only applicable in unitary problem contexts. Participants in unitary problem contexts have similar values, beliefs and interests, share common goals and objectives and are all involved in decision-making about how to achieve the common goals and objectives. It can be argued that this problem context covers only a very small percentage of the problems that an organisation is concerned with and that this inherent paradigmatic limitation in the current definitions of business process management concepts causes the outcomes of the BPM practices based on them to be unrealistic, incomplete and even at points misleading. To address this paradigmatic limitation this paper proposes new definitions for BPM’s main concepts to reduce its tight coupling with the unitary problem context and make it more applicable in pluralist and coercive problem contexts and therefore closer in its outcomes to the reality of the organisation.

Critiquing Business Process Models to Facilitate the Identification and Selection of Optimal IT Systems

In common with many SMEs, Space Engineering Services Ltd supports a number of business process variants found in different parts of the organisation for achieving the same organisational goals using non-optimal IT. In order to address these problems, the capability to use role activity diagrams (RADs) for organisational process modelling was introduced by this Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) using three knowledge transfer mechanisms: a short course on RADs, expert feedback on initial RAD models, and feedback on initial process elicitation efforts. The resulting learning was adopted and adapted by the KTP team into a process that is being used to improve many of the company’s critical strategic processes, and also to identify optimal IT support for those processes. It is expected that this process would benefit many similar SMEs.

Establishing a Business Process Management System in a Telecoms Company

Gamma Telecom provides voice services and voice applications. But newer products are increasingly more complex and the largely manual processes involved in order fulfilment are unable to perform effectively enough. As a result Gamma and the University of the West of England (UWE), in a joint Knowledge Exchange Partnership (KTP) project, are investigating how to automate such product processes using Business Process Management System (BPMS) technology within a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) development framework. A number of product processes have been automated, and the resulting experience and knowledge has been incorporated into a “meta-process”, a process for capturing, modelling, analysing, improving, and providing IT support for Gamma’s new business product processes. It is suggested that a generalised form of this “meta-process” would benefit other companies wishing to pursue process automation.