On Formal Consistency between Value and Coordination Models

In information systems (IS) engineering dierent techniques for modeling inter-organizational collaborations are applied. In particular, value models estimate the profitability for involved stakeholders, whereas coordination models are used to agree upon the inter-organizational processes before implementing them. During the execution of inter-organizational collaboration, in addition, event logs are collected by the individual organizations representing another view of the IS. The combination of the two models and the event log represent the IS and they should therefore be consistent, i.e., not contradict each other. Since these models are provided by dierent user groups during design time and the event log is collected during run-time consistency is not straight forward. Inconsistency occurs when models contain a conflicting description of the same information, i.e., there exists a conflicting overlap between the models. In this paper we introduce an abstraction of value models, coordination models and event logs which allows ensuring and maintaining alignment between models and event log. We demonstrate its use by outlining a proof of an inconsistency resolution result based on this abstraction. Thus, the introduction of abstractions allows to explore formal inter-model relations based on consistency.

[1]  Manfred Reichert,et al.  An Approach to quantify the Costs of Business Process Intelligence , 2005, EMISA.

[2]  Andreas Wombacher,et al.  Consistency Between e3-value Models and Activity Diagrams in a Multi-perspective Development Method , 2005, OTM Conferences.

[3]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Business Process Intelligence , 2009, Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling.

[4]  Raman Kazhamiakin,et al.  A framework for integrating business processes and business requirements , 2004 .

[5]  Jaap Gordijn,et al.  Business Modelling Is Not Process Modelling , 2000, ER.

[6]  Santhosh Kumaran,et al.  From business process model to consistent implementation: a case for formal verification methods , 2002, Proceedings. Sixth International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing.

[7]  Yves Pigneur,et al.  An eBusiness Model Ontology for Modeling eBusiness , 2002, Bled eConference.

[8]  George M. Giaglis,et al.  Dynamic Modeling to Assess the Business Value of Electronic Commerce , 1999, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[9]  Stephen A. White,et al.  Business Process Modeling Notation , 2004 .

[10]  Barry W. Boehm Value-based software engineering: reinventing , 2003, SOEN.

[11]  Jaap Gordijn,et al.  Value-based requirements engineering: exploring innovative e-commerce ideas , 2003, Requirements Engineering.

[12]  Kurt Jensen,et al.  Coloured Petri Nets: Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use. Vol. 2, Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[13]  Birger Andersson,et al.  A Declarative Foundation of Process Models , 2005, CAiSE.

[14]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Loosely coupled interorganizational workflows: : modeling and analyzing workflows crossing organizational boundaries , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[15]  Birger Andersson,et al.  From Business to Process Models - a Chaining Methodology , 2006, BUSITAL.