Enabling Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems Challenges, Methods, Technologies

Transcription

1 Enabling Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems Challenges, Methods, Technologies MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK

2 Content Keynote based on new Springer book Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems

3 Content Part 1 Process-aware Information Systems Part 2 Flexibility Issues Part 3 Flexibility Support for Pre-specified Process Models Pre-specified process models and flexibility-by-design Process configuration Handling of anticipated exceptions Handling unforeseen exceptions with Ad-hoc Changes Process Evolution Process Monitoring, Mining & Analysis Business Process Compliance 3

4 Content Part 4 Loosely-specified Process Models Concretizing Loosely-specified process models Constraint-based process models User and Data Driven Processes A Framework for Object-Aware Processes 4

5 Business Processes and Workflows Part 1 - Process-aware Information Systems MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 5

6 A Retail Process Welcome customer Offer Clothes Bill Clothes Hand over clothes Mendling

7 Business Process Lifecycle Evaluation: Process Mining Business Activity Monitoring Enactment: Operation Monitoring Maintenance Enactment Evaluation Administration and Stakeholders Configuration Design & Analysis Design: Business Process Identification and Modeling Analysis: Validation Simulation Verification M. Weske: Business Process Management, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007 Configuration: System Selection Implementation Test and Deployment Fig 1.5. Business process lifecycle 7

8 BPM Value Proposition Higher Lower Transformation BPM adoption maturity Higher Process Optimization Business insight Process monitoring Value to shareholders and competitiveness Compliance & consistency IT agility Process execution Efficiency Knowledge Lower Process modeling Workers, supervisors, and managers CIO CFO CXO CEO Customers and partners Stakeholders Forester 2007 BPM Market Overview 8

9 Process-aware Information System Process Composer Process Repository Process-aware Information System (PAIS) Create Process Schema Modify Process Schema Check Process Schema Process Models Application Components Late Modeling Web Clnt API Admin. API Msg Queuing Instance 4 Instance 3 Instance 2 Instance 1 Validatíon Process Execution Engine Instance 6 Instance 5 Modeling API Authorization Instance 11 Instance 10 Instance 9 Instance 8 Instance 7 Dyn. Change API Time Mgmt Exceptions Audit Trail... Instance 14 Instance 13 Instance 12 Anwendungen / Application Server... Process Engineer Users 9

10 Simple Process Model Process Model S Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity XOR-Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment 10

11 Built-time versus Run-time - Process Type versus Process Instance Level - 11

12 Business Process System Perspective Process Schema S Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation x + Activity XOR-Split/Join AND-Split/Join clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + Sonography x Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment x Process Instance I1 x + + Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > x x x Process Instance I2 x + + Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, Non Operative Therapy > x x x Activity States: Enabled Completed Skipped 12

13 User Perspective and Work item Lifecycle MRT MRT Process Instance I5 Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x Joe X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Peter Discharge & Documentation + MRT + x x Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning Operative Treatment Offered Allocated Started Completed Offered Allocated Started Completed Withdrawn Withdrawn 13

14 Let s do the MRT User Perspective MRT MRT Process Instance I5 Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x Joe X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Peter Discharge & Documentation + MRT + x x Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning Operative Treatment Offered Allocated Started Completed Offered Allocated Started Completed Withdrawn Withdrawn 14

15 User Perspective Process Instance I5 Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x Joe X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Peter Discharge & Documentation + MRT + x x Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning Operative Treatment Offered Allocated Started Completed Offered Allocated Started Completed Withdrawn Withdrawn 15

16 User Perspective Process Instance I5 Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x Joe X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Peter Discharge & Documentation + MRT + x x Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning Operative Treatment Offered Allocated Started Completed Offered Allocated Started Completed Withdrawn Withdrawn 16

17 User Perspective Initial Initial Process Instance I5 Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x Joe X-ray + MRT + Non Operative Therapy x Non Operative Therapy 1 x x Peter Discharge & Documentation Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning Operative Treatment Offered Allocated Started Completed Offered Allocated Started Completed Withdrawn Withdrawn 17

18 Business Processes and Workflows Part 2 - Flexibility Issues MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 18

19 Process Spectrum Processes on the right side of the spectrum are mostly knowledge-intensive Unpredictability: Course of action depends on situation-specific parameters Non-repeatability: Two process instances hardly look the same Emergence: Future course of action depends on knowledge gained through activity execution 19

20 Variability Variability is typical for many domains and requires that processes are handled differently depending on the particular context Drivers Product and service variability Differences in regulations Different customer groups Temporal differences 20

21 (c) 2012 Barbara Weber, Manfred Reichert Example: Handling Medical Examinations 21 Variety of related variants Same business objective Commonalities Differences due to varying application context

22 Adaptation Ability to adapt the process and its structure to temporary events Drivers Special Situations Exceptions Anticipation of Adaptation Planned Unanticipated 22

23 Evolution Ability of the implemented process to change when the business process evolves Drivers represented in External Changing Business Context Internal Changing Technological Context Design Errors Changing Legal Context Organizational Learning Real-world Process PAIS Technical Problems Poor Internal Quality provide feedback to 23

24 Example: Tender Preparation

25 Evolution Extent of Evolution Incremental Continuous Process Improvement Revolutionary Business Process Reengineering Duration Temporary Permanent 25

26 Evolution Swiftness Deferred Ongoing instances are not affected Immediate Ongoing instances are affected Visibility Observable Behavior Internal Structure 26

27 Looseness Knowledge-intensive processes cannot be fully prespecified, but require loose specifications Drivers Unpredictability Non-Repeatability Emergence 27

28 Flexibility Issues along the Process Lifecycle Traditional Process Lifecycle Support Need for Process Evolution Schema S : A x B Schema S: A C B x x D C x E D Need for Variability Support Need for Looseness of Process Specifications Process engineer / Process administrator Process Monitoring Execution Log Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I B 1 Instance I 1 B A x C B x E A x C x E A x D C x E D D Process Execution Need for Process Adaptation (Support for Planned and Unplanned Exceptions / Special Cases) Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant 28

29 Flexibility Needs and Technological Requirements Flexibility Need Variability Looseness Adaptation Evolution Dimension Planned Unplanned Deferred Evolution Immediate Evolution Poor Internal Quality Organizational Learning Technological Requirement Configuration Loosely-specified processes Exception Handling Ad-hoc Changes Versioning Process Instance Migration Refactoring Monitoring, Analysis and Mining 29

30 Business Processes and Workflows Pre-specified Process Models and Flexibility by Design MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 30

31 Basic Control Flow Concepts Activities Atomic Activities Automated Web services, Java applications, database function Human Electronic forms Complex Activities Refer to sub-process models 31

32 Basic Control Flow Concepts Control Connectors (i.e., Gateways) (X)OR-Split / (X)OR-Join AND-Split / AND-Join Control Flow Edges Sequence Flow Default Path Transition Conditions 32

33 Basic Control Flow Concepts - Example Transition Conditions Atomic Activity Sequence Flow XOR Gateway Default Path AND Gateway 33

34 Basic Data Flow Concepts Data objects + Data edges Data objects can be linked to activities via data edges Read access Write access referenced by transition conditions attached to outgoing messages 34

35 Data Edge Write Access Basic Data Flow Concepts - Example Data Object Data Edge Read Access Transition Condition references SparePartsList 35

36 Examples of Control Flow Patterns (1) For an overview of patterns visit: 36

37 Examples of Control Flow Patterns (2) 37

38 Expressiveness and Flexibility by Design 38

39 Flexibility by Design (Missing) Expressiveness and Flexibility by Design 39

40 Evaluation of Existing PAISs

41 Business Processes and Workflows Process Configuration MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 41

42 Business Processes and Workflows Exception and Compensation Handling MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 42

43 Process Adaptations Planned Unplanned Exception Handling Ad-hoc Changes 43

44 Exception Handling in PAIS Sources for Exceptions Activity Failure Technical Deadline Expiry Semantical Resource Unavailability Inconsistence real-world / PAIS Constraint Violations a suitable handler is chosen Upon detection of a particular exception Exception Handler Trying Alternatives Ordered Unordered Add Behavior Deferred Immediate Fixing Fixing Exceptiondriven Retry Rework Cancelling Behavior Reject Resource Patterns Compensate Delegate Escalate 44

45 Exception Handling Patterns - Immediate Fixing - 45

46 Exception Handling Patterns - Deferred Fixing - 46

47 Exception Handling Patterns - Reject - 47

48 Exception Handling Patterns - Compensate - 48

49 Compensation Handling - Sagas 49 Abort! The SAGAS concept normal processing A B C D Compensation Information Commit Commit Commit A c B c C c System Log Abort Transaction (Rollback Work) ready! Compensation of A Compensation of B Compensation of C Rollback [GaSa87]

50 Compensation Spheres 50

51 Compensation Spheres 51

52 Compensation and Fault Handling in BPEL (1) 52 Scopes provide a context which influences the execution behavior of its enclosed activities scope process scope Local declarations: partner links, message exchanges, variables, correlation sets scope scope Local handlers: event handlers, fault handlers, a termination handler, and a compensation handler scope primary activity Isolated scopes provide control of concurrent access to shared resources scope scope scope scope Termination handler to deal with forced scope termination (external faults) Compensation handler to undo persisted effects of already completed activities 52

53 Compensation and Fault Handling in BPEL (2) 53 process invoke compensation handler invoke 5. Propagate compensation 6. Undo work (in reverse order) scope compensation handler compensate compensation handler invoke 4. Compensate previous work 3. The fault triggers the process-level fault handler fault handler compensate invoke 1. Do some work (successfully invoke two services) invoke 2. Invoke another service (throws fault) This example shows the default compensation behavior supported by BPEL; i.e., a completed scope is compensated by invoking the compensation handlers of its constituting activities in reverse order. How-ver, a more specific compensation handler for a scope may be provided as well (e.g., only com-pensating some of the already completed activities or invoking a specific process dealing with the exception). 53

54 Resource Patterns Exception Handling Patterns (like Deferred Fixing, Reject etc.) focus on behavioral changes Many exceptions (e.g., resource unavailability or deadline expiry) require changes regarding resource perspective like delegation, escalation or reallocation 54

55 Resource Patterns 55

56 Selected Resource Patterns For more details visit: 56

57 Flexible Handling of Work Items Application of Exception Handling patterns often requires changes to the lifecycle of work items. Work items may have to be Skipped Redone Done ahead of time Canceled Suspended/Resumed 57

58 Flexible Handling of Work items 58

59 Flexible Handling of Workitems For more details visit: 59

60 Business Processes and Workflows Handling Unforeseen Exceptions MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 60

61 Process Adaptations Planned Unplanned Exception Handling Ad-hoc Changes 61

62 User View on an Ad-hoc Process Change 62 Examinations Examination Start Exception We need an additional lab test! U Wallace, Edgar U Miller, Anne Check Anesthesiology U Smith, Karl X-Ray Lab Test U Jones, Isabelle Explanation Operation Risks End 62

63 Behavioral Changes Require Structural Process Model Adaptations 63

64 Behavioral Changes Require Adaptations of the Process Instance State 64

65 Behavioral Changes Require Adaptations of the Process Instance State 65

66 Behavioral Changes Must not Violate Process Model Soundness and Proper Instance Execution Data flow error caused by missing data No Proper Completion ensured. End node can be reached since B is still enabled 66

67 Ad-hoc Changes of a Process Instance Must Not Affect any Other Process Instances Process Type Level 67 Process Schema S Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity XOR-Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment Process Instance Level Process Instance I1 x + + x x x Process Instance I2 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission > 67

68 Structurally Adapting Pre-Specified Process Models 68 Change Primitives Add node Remove node Add edge Remove edge Move edge High-Level Change Operations Combines a set of change primitives Referred to as Adaptation Patterns in the following 68

69 Adaptation Patterns 69

70 Adaptation Patterns versus Change Primitives 70

71 Adaptation Patterns versus Change Primitives Change Primitives Operate on single elements of process schema Correctness has to be checked after adaptation No Assumption regarding structure of process schema Process Adaptation Patterns Provide high-level change operations Correctness-by-construction Process schema needs to be blockstructured 71

72 Dynamic Change Bug 72

73 Correctness of Process Instance Changes 73 Ensuring Dynamic Correctness Schema S: A B C D activated step E F Schema S : A make invoice B D C invoice E send invoice F May the depicted schema change be propagated to the process instance? Need for general correctness criterion State Compliance [ReDa98, RRW08a, RRD04a, RRD04b] 73

74 Correctness of Process Instance Changes 74 Ensuring Dynamic Correctness Schema S: A B C D activated step E F Schema S : A make invoice B D C invoice E send invoice F <A>, <B>, <D> Trace reproducible on new schema? More complicated: loop backs Further challenges: - How to efficiently check for compliance? - How to efficiently migrate process instances? [RRD04a, RRD04b] 74

75 Process Type Level Correctness of Process Instance Changes 75 Process Schema S Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity XOR-Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment Process Instance Level Process Instance I3 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 3 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, MRT, X-ray, Sonography > I3 is not state compliant with change Delete (I3, MRT) 75

76 Handling Planned and Unplanned Exceptions with AristaFlow BPM Suite Example: Order Handling Process

77 Handling Planned and Unplanned Exceptions with AristaFlow BPM Suite

78 Handling Planned and Unplanned Exceptions with AristaFlow BPM Suite

79 Handling Planned and Unplanned Exceptions with AristaFlow BPM Suite

80 Business Processes and Workflows Process Monitoring, Analysis and Mining MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 80

81 A) Process Model C) Execution Log Entries of Process Instance 4711 Process Model S Process Instance 4711 on S 1 2 clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes x : Patient Admission 2: Anamnesis & Clinical Examination 3: Non Operative Therapy 4: X-Ray 5: MRT 6: Sonography B) Process Instances x x x x + + x x x cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes 10 7: Non Operative Therapy 1 8: Initial Treatment & Operation Planning 9: Operative Therapy 10: Discharge & Documentation Insert(S, Follow-up Examination, Non Operative Therapy, XOR-Join 1) Insert(S, Puncture, Follow-up Examination, XOR- Join 1) Activity States: Delete (S,MRT) Running Completed XOR-Join1 XOR-Join1 Skipped Activity Event User Timestamp Patient Admission Start Garry 2007/09/08 15:30 Patient Admission Complete Garry 2007/09/08 15:45 Anamnesis & Clinical Examination Anamnesis & Clinical Examination Start Helen 2007/09/09 11:00 Complete Helen 2007/09/09 11:45 X-Ray Start Paula 2007/09/09 12:34 Sonography Start Sandy 2007/09/09 13:20 X-Ray Complete Paula 2007/09/09 14:00 Sonography Complete Sandy 2007/09/09 14:30 Non Operative Therapy 1 Non Operative Therapy 1 Start Peter 2007/09/10 09:10 Complete Peter 2007/09/10 09:45 Follow-up Examination Start Helen 2007/09/12 11:07 Follow-up Examination Complete Helen 2007/09/12 11:20 Puncture Start Helen 2007/09/12 11:21 D) Change Log Entries of Process Instance 4711 Change TX Applied Changes User Timestamp 001 Delete (S, MRT) Paula 2007/09/09 12: Insert(S, Follow-up Examination, Non Operative Therapy, XOR-Join 1) 002 Insert(S, Puncture, Follow-up Examination, XOR-Join 1) Helen 2007/09/10 09:00 Helen 2007/09/10 09:00

82 Process Instance /09/09 10: x Restoring Structure and State from Execution and Change Log Process Instance /09/09 12: Process Instance /09/10 09: x x x x x XOR-Join x x x XOR-Join : Follow-up Examination 12: Puncture x x x XOR-Join1 82

83 Mining Execution Logs Process Discovery Presumes the presence of an event log and extracts information from such a log (e.g., process model, social network) Conformance checking Analyzes whether or not the process instances in the log follow prescribed behavior of rules Extension algorithms Enhance the process model based on information from the execution log (e.g., decision mining) For more details see processmining.org 83

84 What can Process Mining be used for? operational process supports/ controls information system records refers to models configures (un)desired properties process models process discovery conformance testing event logs log-based verification Processmining.org 84

85 Process Discovery using Heuristic Miner 85

86 Process Discovery using Heuristic Miner 86

87 Conformance Checking 87

88 LTL Checker 88

89 Business Processes and Workflows Process Evolution MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 89

90 Evolution Drivers represented in External Internal Changing Business Context Changing Technological Context Design Errors Changing Legal Context Organizational Learning Real-world Process PAIS Technical Problems Poor Internal Quality provide feedback to 90

91 Schema Evolution 91 91

92 Change Support Features Schema Evolution, Version Control and Instance Migration 92 Schema Evolution Changes at the process type level How to deal with running instances when adapting the original process schema? Scenario 1: No version control Scenario 2: Co-existence of instances of old / new schema Scenario 3: Change propagation and instance migration 92

93 Scenario 1 - No Version Control Schema is overwritten and instances are migrated 93 Type change overwrites schema S Process Schema S C A B + + E F AND-Split1 D AND-Join1 Insert X between A and B Insert Y between C and AND-Join1 Schema Evolution Process Schema S A X B + + E F AND-Split1 C Y D AND-Join1 Process Instance I1 C A B + + E F D Process Instance I2 Process Instance I1 C Y A X B + + E F D Process Instance I2 C Change is propagated to A B + + E F all running A X B D process instances C Y + + E F D Inconsistent state 93

94 Scenario 2 - Version Control Co-existence of instances of different schema versions Type change results into a new version of schema S Process Schema S A B AND-Split1 C D AND-Join1 Schema Evolution Process Schema S + + E F A X B 94 Insert X between A and B Insert Y between C and AND-Join1 AND-Split1 C + + E F D Y AND-Join1 Old instances remain with schema S Instances created from S (before schema evolution) Process Instance I1 C A B + + E F D Process Instance I2 C A B + + E F D Instances created from S (after schema evolution) Process Instance I4 C Y A X B + + E F D Process Instance I5 C Y A X B + + E F D 94

95 Scenario 3 Instance Migration Compliant instances are migrated to the new schema Type change results into a new version of schema S Process Schema S A B AND-Split1 C D AND-Join1 Schema Evolution Migration of compliant process instances to S Process Schema S + + E F A X B 95 Insert X between A and B Insert Y between C and AND-Join1 AND-Split1 C + + E F D Y AND-Join1 Process Instance I1 C A B + + E F D Process Instance I2 C A B + + E F D Propagation of compliant process instances to schema S (incl. state adaptations) Process Instance I1 C Y A X B + + E F D Process Instance I 2 not compliant with S 95

96 Business Processes and Workflows Business Process Compliance MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 96

97 Motivation Process correct? Syntax? Soundness?

98 Motivation Process correct? 3 is violated!

99 Business Processes and Workflows Summary MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 11 TH 2012 PRESENTED BY BARBARA WEBER UNIV. OF INNSBRUCK 99

100 Integrated Lifecycle Support for Adaptive and Dynamic Processes (1) 100 Traditional Process Lifecycle Support Schema S : Schema S: B A x C B x A x D C x E D Process engineer / Process administrator Process Monitoring Execution Log Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I 1 Instance I 1 B B A x C B x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D Process Execution Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant 100

101 Integrated Lifecycle Support for Adaptive and Dynamic Processes (2) 101 Lifecycle Support in adaptive PAISs Schema S : Schema S: B A x C B x A x D C x E D Process engineer / Process administrator Process Monitoring Execution Log Change Log Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I 1 Instance I 1 Change Propagation B B A x C B x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D Process Execution Instancespecific Change Exception: Delete (I 1, E) Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant 101

102 Summary Increasing adoption of PAISs to support business processes at an operational level Effective business process support imposes several different flexibility needs Adaptation, Evolution, Variability, and Looseness Flexibility needs partially supported by existing commercial systems

103 Summary Increasing adoption of PAISs to support business processes at an operational level Effective business process support imposes several different flexibility needs Adaptation Evolution Variability Looseness

104 Summary Adaptation support through Exception handling (preplanned exceptions) Ad-hoc changes (unforeseen changes) Evolution support through Versioning of process models Instance migration Variability support through Process Configuration

105 Summary Looseness requires different paradigms for representing business processes Constraint-based process models Data-centric / Object-aware process models

106 Thank you for your attention! For more information visit our website our facebook page follow bpm_qe on twitter, or send an to