The following tutorials will take place as part of the conference:

  1. From Conceptual to Executable BPMN Process Models: A step-by-step Method
  2. Optimize Business Process and Data Quality with Master Data Governance through Integration of MDM and BPM
  3. Which is the Best Modeling Language?

Tutorial 1: From Conceptual to Executable BPMN Process Models: A step-by-step Method

Designing executable business process models requires an approach to process modelling that is different from the approach needed when designing conceptual process models for communication or analysis. Because of their purpose and without detriment to their usefulness, conceptual process models are often incomplete, ambiguous, and defined at a level of granularity that is not suitable for developing an IT system to support the execution of the process. Conversely, executable process models must be precise and complete specifications so as to be interpreted by a Business Process Management System (BPMS). Also, executable process models focus on what needs to be supported by the IT system and purposefully omit aspects or fragments of the process that are not visible to the IT system. In other words, neither the executable model is a refinement of the conceptual model, nor vice-versa, but they are rather different views on the underlying process.

This tutorial will present an end-to-end methodology to incrementally transform a conceptual process model into an executable one using the BPMN 2.0 modelling language.

The tutorial will consist of two parts, each 1.5 hours long. In the first part, we will show how to design a process model suitable for automation purposes. We will explain the differences between a conceptual “to be” model designed for communication and analysis, and a “to-be-executed” model designed for automation purposes. We will then present a method for transforming a “to-be” model into a “to-be-executed” model, consisting of the following steps:

  • Identifying the automation boundaries
  • Reviewing manual tasks
  • Completing the process model
  • Adjusting the task granularity

For each step in this method we will outline a set of corresponding principles and guidelines and illustrate them via a concrete example.

In the second part of the tutorial, we will show how to transform the “to-be-executed” process model into an “executable” process model. We will start by giving an overview of the landscape of BPMSs, their architecture and their support for BPMN. We will then concretely illustrate how to enrich the to-be-executed model with execution properties in order to obtain a fully executable process model. We will then deploy and run this model in a BPMN-based BPMS.

The tutorial will be supported by a concrete example of an order-to-cash process. We will demonstrate step-by-step how to go from the conceptual model captured in a process modelling environment, to a fully executable model in a BPMS. During this demonstration, the typical components of a BPMS will also be presented.

About the presenter

Marcello La Rosa is associate professor and the Information Systems School Academic Director for corporate engagements at Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. He is also a Researcher at the National ICT Australia. Marcello leads the Apromore initiative (www.apromore.org) – a strategic collaboration between various universities for the development of an advanced process model repository. His research interests focus on process consolidation, mining, configuration and automation. Marcello has taught BPM to students and practitioners in Australia for over five years. He is co-author of the textbook “Fundamentals of Business Process Management” (Springer, 2013). More information on Marcello can be found at www.marcellolarosa.com.

Marlon Dumas is professor of Software Engineering at University of Tartu and Research Director at the Estonian Software Technologies and Applications Competence Centre (STACC). He is co-author of the textbook “Fundamentals of Business Process Management” (Springer, 2013) and co-editor of Process-Aware Information Systems (Wiley, 2005). He is an active BPM researcher with a focus on process modelling, analysis, refactoring and mining. His research in the field of BPM has received several awards at international conferences including a best paper award at the 8th International Conference on BPM and a 10-years most influential paper award at the MODELS’2011 conference. He is also co-inventor of five BPM-related patents. More information can be found at http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/.

Tutorial 2: Optimize Business Process and Data Quality with Master Data Governance through Integration of MDM and BPM

Business Processes can be beneficial from reliable and trusted data through data policy in Data Governance. Data Governance is demanding in the organizations to increase the values of consumption on trusted and accurate data, which ensures having the single version of truth to make smarter business decisions.

With Master Data Management (MDM), it allows to create and maintain the single truth of trusted and accurate data, where Business Process Management (BPM) provides organizations the ability to capture and to optimize the business operations and master data from the perspectives such as policy administration and enforcement toward the value and benefit on data and business process quality.

Attendees will experience the value of business processes and data quality optimization through hands on lab exercise with BPM to create and manage the workflow of business process and policies to be enforced. Later on, they will be exposed to enforce the data governance using the master data and services from MDM as administering and enforcing the master data policies.

About the presenter

Kenneth K. Cheung is a Technical Enablement Specialist in Master Data Management (MDM) under IBM’s InfoSphere Partner Ecosystem. He provides technical presentation on InfoSphere MDM technology and solution to IBM Business Partners. So as engagement on technical enablement and consultation. Previously he was an experienced Technical Support Analyst particular in MDM for 6 years and WebSphere Commerce for 3 years. During the period, he focuses the work and specialties on Serviceability to proactively enhance trouble shoot and recovery capability through experiences on critical client cases. (http://www-01.ibm.com/software/data/support/profiles.html#kenneth)

Tera Chung is a technical enablement specialist within IBM Information Management Partner Ecosystem Team with specializing in InfoSphere Master Data Management. Her focus is enabling IBM Business Partners around the world on MDM by providing technical mentorship and consultation of MDM as well as developing and delivering presentations on MDM technology and its solution. In her previous role as a software developer, she has over three years of experience in developing InfoSphere MDM Advanced Edition (MDM Server), passionately and successfully delivered many features of MDM Server.

Tutorial 3: Which is the Best Modeling Language?

Modeling is an important part of Business Process Management as it provides a visual representation of the model. Business Process Modeling aids to process documentation, process execution, process monitoring, process simulation and optimization. Lot of business process modeling languages has been proposed in last few years. Some of these are quite popular commercially such as Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), Business Process Execution Language (BPEL), Event-driven Process Chains (EPC), while some like Petri net are popular among researchers.

There are some questions related to selecting modeling languages. What makes the people choose the modeling language defining their processes? How does a modeler know if the modeling language selected by her/him will be able to represent the process model completely? Will there be an ambiguity in understanding the process when a process model is given to a user?

To answer the first question, most of the times people select a tool or software provider, e.g. people opt for IBM products thus use BPMN and extended BPEL, or they select ARIS and end up using EPC. In such case, they are looking at capability of software provider rather than the modeling language used. This may seem fine when it comes to commercial usage as apart from capability of modeling language, it is important to have after sales support, user manuals and training. Still some enthusiastic organizations may want to look for innovative tools which offer new advanced features. These organizations may want to evaluate the features of tools including the capability of process modeling language to model the domain.

What about the researchers? Researchers need to look for capabilities of the modeling language rather than the software provider. A researcher may want to use a modeling language for specific purpose, extend a language or even develop a new language. For researchers, it is important to accurately and unambiguously represent the business process. It becomes important for researchers to know the quality of the modeling language before selecting it.

Next question is how to evaluate the quality of the modeling language. Modeling language can be evaluated for quality of its script, grammar and method. Modelers adopt different modeling methods to create a script (model) by using the modeling grammar. Eventually it is the modeling grammar which ensures the quality of the model as same method of modeling can be used for multiple languages. Modeling grammar can be evaluated on three dimensions, syntax, semantics and pragmatics. Semantics of a grammar which help the modeler represent the process as a model and later help the user understand the model. Thus in this tutorial we will present method to evaluate the modeling grammar for its semantics.

Semantics of a modeling grammar can be evaluated using theory of ontology. Bunge-Wand-Weber (BWW) representation model is an ontology based model to represent information systems. The BWW representation model is based on the Bunge’s ontology to represent the world in a science oriented way and Wand and Weber extended and modified the ontology to suit the information systems.

Many researchers have used BWW representation model for evaluating the process modeling languages such as Petri net, BPMN, BPEL, ebXML, Data Flow Diagrams, EPC, etc. As we studied the analysis presented by the researchers, we realized that there is a need for discussion of BWW representation model for business process modeling and there is even a more compulsive need for stricter analysis of modeling grammars against the representation model. This tutorial will explain BWW representation model in details with enough examples so that researchers in future can evaluate the modeling languages more accurately. We will explain each construct of BWW representation model in the tutorial and provide examples from “order management” business process on how the construct can relate to the business process.

Once BWW representation model is explained, we will evaluate one business process modeling language with the help of audience. We will map the constructs of BWW representation model with the constructs of selected modeling language and discuss the reasons for the mapping. We will analyze the language for construct deficit, construct excess, construct overload and construct redundancy.

In the end, we will present comparison of various business process modeling languages against BWW representation model. We will highlight limitations of the languages due to construct deficit, ambiguity caused by construct redundancy and overload and if excess construct can be represented by existing constructs of the modeling language.

This tutorial intends to be hands-on where we will train the audience to evaluate the modeling grammar using BWW representation model.

About the presenters

Sukriti Goel has been performing industrial research in area of BPM as Research Scientist at Infosys Labs. She has worked in area of process modeling, process mining, process execution and process monitoring and has published some papers and book chapters in these areas. She joined as a PhD candidate at IITB Monash Research Academy and now performing research in area of business process testing which includes creating a meta-model for process design and automated test suite generation and execution.