Deliverable D3.1 Domain Analysis of Business

FP7 ICT STREP Project

Deliverable D3.1

Domain Analysis of Business Pro- cesses in Public Administrations

http://www.learnpad.eu

LATEX template v. 0.5

Project Number : FP7-619583 Project Title : Learn PAd Model-Based Social Learning for Public Administrations

Deliverable Number : D3.1 Title of Deliverable : Domain Analysis of Business Processes in Public Admin- istrations Nature of Deliverable : Deliverable Dissemination level : Public Licence : Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License Version : 4.0 Contractual Delivery Date : 31 July 2014 Actual Delivery Date : 31 July 2014 Contributing WP : WP3 Editor(s) : Alfonso Pierantonio (UDA) Author(s) : Knut Hinkelmann (FHNW), Vedran Hrgovcic (BOC), Al- fonso Pierantonio (UDA), Gianni Rosa (UDA), Darius Silin- gas (NME), Barbara Thonssen¨ (FHNW) Reviewer(s) : Andrea Polini (UNICAM), Antonia Bertolino (CNR)

Abstract In this document we identified the most relevant concepts related to the Learn PAd domain. To this end, we analyzed a number of business processes from the Public Administration. The result of such a stage consists on the one hand of a collection of identified concepts and artifacts, and on the other hand of an identification of the main difficulties in modeling business processes in the Public Administration. Therefore, the document analyzes also the modeling notations and the practices. This will conduct us to the meta-models to be defined and refined in the forthcoming months.

Keyword List Learn PAd Domain Analysis, Modeling Notations, Enterprise Frameworks

Learn PAd FP7-619583 III Learn PAd FP7-619583 IV Document History

Version Changes Author(s) Alfonso Pierantonio (UDA), Gianni Rosa (UDA), Vedran Hrgovcic 0.1 Table of Content (BOC), Knut Hinkel- mann (FHNW), Fabio Mancinelli (XWIKI), Darius Silingas(NME)) Alfonso Pierantonio (UDA), Gianni Rosa (UDA), Vedran Hrgovcic 0.2 ToC Consolidation (BOC), Knut Hinkel- mann (FHNW), Fabio Mancinelli (XWIKI), Darius Silingas(NME)) Knut Hinkelmann (FHNW), Alfonso Pieran- tonio (UDA), Gianni 1.0 Preliminary draft Rosa (UDA), Darius Silingas (NME), Barbara Thonssen¨ (FHNW) 1.1 Switch to the LaTeX template Gianni Rosa (UDA) Knut Hinkelmann (FHNW), Alfonso Pieran- tonio (UDA), Gianni 2.0 Internal release Rosa (UDA), Darius Silingas (NME), Barbara Thonssen¨ (FHNW) Knut Hinkelmann (FHNW), Alfonso Pieran- tonio (UDA), Gianni 3.0 Candidate Final release Rosa (UDA), Darius Silingas (NME), Barbara Thonssen¨ (FHNW) Knut Hinkelmann (FHNW), Alfonso Pieran- tonio (UDA), Gianni 4.0 Final release Rosa (UDA), Darius Silingas (NME), Barbara Thonssen¨ (FHNW)

Learn PAd FP7-619583 V Document Reviews

Release Date Ver. Reviewers Comments June 11, ToC 0.2 N.A. N.A. 2014 Draft July 10, 2014 1.1 N.A. N.A. Comments in the review reports Internal July 19, 2014 2.0 Andrea Polini available from the internal wiki Candidate Comments in the review reports July 24, 2014 3.0 Antonia Bertolino Final available from the internal wiki

Learn PAd FP7-619583 VI Glossary, acronyms & abbreviations

Item Description BMM Business Motivation Model BP Business Process BPMN Business Process Model and Notation BPDM Business Process Deﬁnition Meta-model CM Competency Model CMMN Case Management Model and Notation CRM Conceptual Reference Model CSCL Computer Supported Collaborative Learning DDM Document (Data) Model DM Decision Model DMN Decision Model and Notation EMF Eclipse Modeling Framework KPI Key Performance Index ITLET Information Technology for Learning, Education and Training LTSO Learning Technology Standards Observatory MDA Model-Driven Architecture MDE Model-Driven Engineering MOF Meta Object Facility OM Organization Model OMG Object Management Group TOGAF The Open Group Architecture Framework UML Uniﬁed Modeling Language XMI XML Metadata Interchange

Learn PAd FP7-619583 VII Learn PAd FP7-619583 VIII Table Of Contents

List Of Tables...... XI

List Of Figures...... XV

1 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Structure of this deliverable...... 2

2 Public Administration Domain Analysis...... 3 2.1 Processes in the Public Administration...... 3 2.1.1 Knowledge-intensive processes...... 3 2.2 Domain Analysis...... 4 2.3 The Considered Processes...... 6 2.3.1 Process P1: Family Reunion...... 6 2.3.2 Process P2: Grant Citizenship...... 9 2.3.3 Process P3: Bouncer registration...... 12 2.4 Models for Supporting Learning Processes in Public Administrations...... 14 2.4.1 Models and Meta-models in MDE...... 14 2.4.2 Models in Learn PAd...... 16

3 Knowledge Management and Associated Learning Processes...... 21 3.1 Knowledge Needed for Learning in the Context of Business Processes...... 21 3.2 Input for learning...... 28 3.2.1 Input for individual learning...... 30

4 Analysis of Modeling Languages and Practices...... 35 4.1 Process Logic: Structured Process and Case Management...... 35 4.2 Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN)...... 35 4.2.1 Overview...... 35 4.2.2 An Essential Subset of BPMN 2.0 for Modeling Public Administration Processes...... 38 4.2.3 Best Practices in Modeling Business Processes...... 39 4.2.4 Extending BPMN and Integrating with Other Models and Resources...... 44 4.3 Modelling Case-based Processes...... 44 4.4 Modelling Business Logic...... 47 4.4.1 The Decision Model and Notation (DMN)...... 48 4.4.2 The Decision Model...... 48 4.5 Enterprise Architecture...... 49 4.5.1 Zachmann Framework...... 52 4.5.2 TOGAF...... 53 4.5.3 ArchiMate...... 55

Learn PAd FP7-619583 IX 5 Discussion...... 59

6 Conclusions...... 69

Bibliography...... 71

Learn PAd FP7-619583 X List Of Tables

Table 2.1: Beneﬁciaries involved in the Family Reunion process...... 7

Table 2.2: Administrations involved in the Family Reunion process...... 8

Table 2.3: Beneﬁciaries involved in the Italian citizenship process...... 18

Table 2.4: Administrations involved in the grant Citizenship process...... 19

Table 4.1: Essential elements of BPMN 2.0...... 40

Table 5.1: Identiﬁed modeling constructs...... 67

Learn PAd FP7-619583 XI Learn PAd FP7-619583 XII List Of Figures

Figure 2.1: Organizational behavior related organizational learning...... 5

Figure 2.2: The analysis process...... 5

Figure 2.3: A high-level ﬂow-chart of the reunion process...... 7

Figure 2.4: Family reunion Business Process modelling...... 9

Figure 2.5: A high-level ﬂow-chart of the citizenship process...... 10

Figure 2.6: Grant Citizenship Business Process modelling...... 12

Figure 2.7: A high-level ﬂow-chart of bouncer registration process...... 13

Figure 2.8: Bouncer Registration Business Process modelling...... 14

Figure 2.9: Models conforming to a sample meta-model...... 16

Figure 2.10: The four layers meta-modeling architecture...... 16

Figure 2.11: Learn PAd platform overall representation...... 17

Figure 3.1: Exemplary Overview of Models Needed to Describe Learning...... 22

Figure 3.2: Business Process ’Process Customer Application’...... 23

Figure 3.3: Sub-Process ’Check Application Details’ represented in enhanced CMMN...... 24

Figure 3.4: Business Process ’Process Customer Application’ and opened Sub-Process ’Check Application Details’...... 25

Figure 3.5: BMM Overview ([31], p. 12)...... 26

Figure 3.6: Example of Organisational Model...... 27

Figure 3.7: The ITLET Conceptual Reference Model for Competency Information and Related Objects ([20], p. 7)...... 28

Figure 3.8: Document Model...... 29

Figure 3.9: Business Process for Creating and Updating Learner’s Proﬁle...... 30

Figure 3.10: Learner’s Proﬁle ([8], p. 19)...... 31

Figure 3.11: Process for Individual Learning Off-Line...... 31

Figure 3.12: Global Sub-Process for Assessing Learning...... 32

Learn PAd FP7-619583 XIII Figure 3.13: Process for Individual Learning On-Line...... 33

Figure 4.1: Different types of diagrams provided by BPMN 2.0...... 36

Figure 4.2: An example of a public process, which represents the interactions between a private business process and another process or participant. Only those activities that are used to communicate to the other participant(s), plus the order of these activities, are included in the public process. All other internal activities of the private business process are not shown in the public process view...... 36

Figure 4.3: An example of a private process that is internal to a speciﬁc organization...... 37

Figure 4.4: An example of choreography, which deﬁnes the expected behavior as a procedural contract between interacting participants. While a private process exists within a pool, a choreography exists between pools (or participants) and does not have a single control point...... 37

Figure 4.5: An example of collaborative business process diagram, which represents multiple interacting public processes that collaborate to achieve a speciﬁc goal...... 38

Figure 4.6: The essential subset of BPMN 2.0 elements for creating high-level private business process models that are useful for communication, knowledge sharing, and learning purposes (based on practical consulting/training experience from NME)...... 39

Figure 4.7: An example of a business process diagram with inconsistent naming, which indicates misuse of BPMN 2.0 elements...... 41

Figure 4.8: An example of refactored business process diagram with a consistent naming and proper use of BPMN 2.0 elements...... 42

Figure 4.9: An example of decomposing a complex business process diagram into several levels of detail...... 43

Figure 4.10: An example of process model anti-pattern, where explicit inclusion of business rules make the business process model both complicated and fragile (typically business rules change more frequently than the process ﬂow)...... 43

Figure 4.11: An appropriate business process model abstraction level, which gets rid of multiple gateways and represents only a task for making a decision...... 44

Figure 4.12: Design-time phase modeling and run-time phase planning [34]...... 45

Figure 4.13: Plan Items in CMMN [34]...... 46

Figure 4.14: Tasks in CMMN [34]...... 46

Figure 4.15: Example of a Case Plan Model in CMMN [34]...... 47

Figure 4.16: Aspects of process and decision modeling [38]...... 48

Figure 4.17: Aspects of process and decision modeling [38]...... 49

Learn PAd FP7-619583 XIV Figure 4.18: Decision Model diagram [56]...... 50

Figure 4.19: Rule Family table in the context of a Decision Model diagram[56]...... 50

Figure 4.20: Conceptual Model for EAD (excerpt from ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 provided by DSCI 2012)...... 51

Figure 4.21: Excerpt of an Enterprise Architecture based on Zachmanns EAF Matrix ([50])...... 52

Figure 4.22: Zachmann’s EAF Matrix...... 53

Figure 4.23: TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) ([53])...... 54

Figure 4.24: The TOGAF framework and the ArchiMate modeling language ([13])...... 55

Figure 4.25: ArchiMate Structure...... 55

Figure 4.26: Extended Conceptual Model ArchiMEO (based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 provided by DSCI 2012)...... 56

Figure 4.27: Basic Terms and Relations of Swiss e-Government Architecture (based on [9])...... 57

Learn PAd FP7-619583 XV Learn PAd FP7-619583 XVI 1 Introduction

The role of the Public Administration in advanced industrial societies is changing under the impact of several factors including law and regulations modifications, societal globalization, corporate management, decentralization, political control, fast technology evolution and decreasing budgets. The resulting evolutionary pressure represents a challenge for Public Administration and administrators alike to con- stantly improve their service quality and adapt existing processes to the new emerging scenarios. The aim of this project is to provide civil servants with a learning platform supporting both an informative learning approach based on enriched business process (BP) models, and a procedural learning approach based on simulation and monitoring (learning by doing). To this end, open-source commu- nities principles and cooperation spirit will be adopted: contents are produced by the community, and meritocracy is naturally promoted, with leaders emerging because of their skill and expertise. In the context of Learn PAd, WP3 aims at defining the meta-models for BP notations to be adopted within the project. In particular, meta-modelling allows the construction of a collection of concepts within a certain domain formalized in a meta-model that describes the common properties of its instances according to the underlying semantics. The project provides different level of abstraction over BP specifications. Specific transformations will be defined in order to have informative specifications for the learners and at the same time specifications containing sufficient information to permit simulation and monitoring. The meta-models have to be defined according to an iterative process consisting of two main steps: a) elicitation of new concepts from the considered domain to the meta-model; and b) validation of the formalization of the concepts by describing part of real systems. The outcome of this iterative process will be a number of interrelated meta-models consisting of modeling constructs to be used for the specification and analysis of business processes in the domain of Public Administrations. In this document, we present the first results of WP3 related to the following task (from the Learn PAd DoW):

– Task 3.1: Identify the objects and relationships that are needed to be modeled for the management and learning of business processes. Find use cases that capture the most relevant information that is used while managing business processes in the domain of Public Administrations. In particular, given the standard procedures that are followed by civil servants to manage business processes, identify what are the elements and artefacts that should be modelled in the context of Learn PAd . The identiﬁed elements and artefacts are aligned with existing (standard) meta models and modeling languages for business process management, in particular the OMG standards BPMN and BPDM, and their implementations and extensions in BPM and Enterprise Architecture modelling tools like Adonis Enterprise Architect or Agilian (just to mention a few). In addition to the ﬂow models, related meta-models covering additional views on business processes are analyzed like the Choreography and Collaboration Meta Model of BPMN, the Case Management Modeling and Notation (CMMN), data and document meta-models, rule modeling languages (SBVR) and the OMG Business Motivation models. Furthermore, approaches for modeling KPIs and relating them to business processes will be analyzed.

Therefore, the main purpose of this deliverable is to identify the objects and the possible relationships that are needed to be modeled for the management and learning of business processes. To this end, a number of business processes from the Public Administration have been identiﬁed and analyzed. This

Learn PAd FP7-619583 1 represented the starting point for an analysis which has been performed also considering complementary descriptions which can roughly be summarized in the following concerns: business motivation, case, learning, knowledge, information, organization, and process. However, whereas today BPMN models are fairly often used in Public Administrations those additional meta-models are rarely available yet since their creation is time consuming and requires speciﬁc modeling know-how. We further considered, best practices and anti-patterns in modeling business processes in the Public Administration. The outcome of the analysis consists of a catalog of classiﬁed concepts organized according to their homogeneity and the concerns reported above.

1.1. Structure of this deliverable

The deliverable is organized as follows. In the next section, an in-depth analysis of the three business process models from to the Italian Public Administration is provided. The outcome of such an analysis consists in the identiﬁcation of those recurrent concepts which are typically used for describing organizational behaviors. In order to consider also the knowledge management Sect.3 provides the discussion of relevant related notations, such as the Business Motivation Model (BMM), the Organi- zation Model (OM), the Competency Model (CM), and the Document Model (DM). These models are important because they tend to complement the description of the organizational behavior given by the process models. In Sect.4, a discussion about the Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) is provided since most of the time such kind of processes typically present knowledge intensive activities. How the different model types ﬁt into a whole representing various aspects of an enterprise architecture is also detailed in Sect. 4. Moreover, a discussion on how business processes are typically used in the Public Administration is also given by illustrating how current limitations affects the adoption of standards like BPMN 2.0. The result of the overall investigation is enucleated in the discussion of Sect.5 where the most relevant concepts are arranged in a categorized catalog. Finally, conclusions are drawn in Sect.6.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 2 2 Public Administration Domain Analysis

The scope of this section is to better understand how Public Administrations make use of business process modeling. To this end, besides a brief introduction to knowledge-intensive processes, three business processes are taken into consideration and in-depth analyzed. Also, modeling techniques are illustrated to introduce what are the modeling standards and techniques which will be necessary to adopt in the sequel of the project to formalize the concepts which will be elicited in this deliverable.

2.1. Processes in the Public Administration

The Public Administration is transforming its regulation framework in order to improve efficiency, effec- tiveness and economy management. Citizens are demanding better services, better security and better democracy, while business demands less bureaucracy and more efficiency. In this kind of transformation the role of processes is crucial, they are at the base of services delivery and they are based on the organization structure. Consequently, process design, and more in general process management, is key to success. Moreover, according to the European Interoperability Framework [4] and its adoptions in the European member states, one of the main challenge in Public Administration (PA) is to cope with large collections of interconnected Business Processes (BPs). A business process in Public Administration can be regarded as a sequence of activities that the administration executes in order to produce a service for the end user. It i) starts with receiving of some input (i.e. request, documentation), ii) continues with performing activities that add value (i.e., checks) using resources (i.e., humans, information, structures), and iii) finally produces an output. A public process is oriented to provide to a customer (citizen, company, or other Public Administrations) an artifact that usually is referring to granting different permission, licenses and rights (for example building permission, business licenses, driving licenses, etc.). It is important to underline that

– the activities that the PA has to perform are strictly guided by rules that emphasize the recognition of the legality and regularity of the administrative work; and

– a service provided by government can be fully carried out within an administration, may require information held by other institutions, or may be provided in collaboration with other public institutions.

Therefore, a process of a Public Administration must comply with all regulations governing the subject of the service. Designing a Business Process is itself a complex interdisciplinary and time consuming process that involves judgments based on domain knowledge and experience, due to the multifaceted and dynamic nature of organization.

2.1.1. Knowledge-intensive processes

Business processes in Public Administrations are mainly knowledge-intensive. Thus, civil servants are used to dealing with huge amounts of information: lessons learned in previous engagements, insights from prior projects, notes for subsequent process steps are scattered among manifold knowledge con- tainers, from the personal memory, over paper, to different electronic systems. Such knowledge is

Learn PAd FP7-619583 3 necessary on one hand for accomplishing the required tasks, and on the other hand to determine what are the tasks to be executed in presence of uncertainty. Even if there are mechanisms to explicitly capture and store bits and pieces of best practice, these are seldom used in a coordinated manner and, at best, take into account document content, but not so much document context, i.e. neither the creation situation nor the potential usage situation. On the other hand, business processes are a context-giving, structuring element prevalent in a company, often even formally modelled for some purpose such that it would make sense to exploit the usage of business processes to organize knowledge archives. To this end, it is of crucial relevance to be able to provide the user with contextually selected, task- and user- speciﬁc background knowledge. In particular, the civil servant should be able to access the required knowledge in an optimal manner. This can be achieved by coupling the process (formal or informal) description with the descriptive units about the kind of data and document type being considered by the process. Ideally, the notion of context provided by the process permits users to know:

- what to do

- who does what

- what to do after the task

In such a way the users engaged in their daily work routines have not to spend much time and effort in knowledge and information management activities additional to their operative ones. This is even more important in Public Administrations since explicit knowledge relevant for a specific task or decision is normally spread over many different kinds of documents, forms, legislative texts, etc. The necessity to analyze the business process from a knowledge-management perspective is largely recognized (for instance, see [15]). A basic assumption is the lack of knowledge about the process, although such knowledge can be acquired. However, because of the tacit character of process knowledge, the main source is inevitably the organization’s own operations. Acquiring knowledge is first of all a question of being active in the new environment rather than of collecting and analyzing information. Another assumption is that decisions and implementations concerning the process are made incrementally due to the inherent uncertainty. Incrementalism can be seen as a management learning process in which learning by doing is the basic logic. Overall, the perceived risk is primarily a function of the level of domain knowledge acquired through ones own activities. Knowledge is highly dependent on individuals and therefore difficult to transfer to other individuals and contexts: in essence, as mentioned by [21]:

“experience itself can never be transmitted, it produces a change — frequently a subtle change — in individuals and cannot be separated from them”.

Consequently, the problems and opportunities intrinsic to a certain domain will be discovered primarily by those who are working in that domain. Clearly, the most interesting aspect is to understand how organizations learn and the learning impacts on organizational behavior as illustrated in Fig. 2.1, where both are mutually and continuously inﬂuenced.

2.2. Domain Analysis

The analysis consisted in selecting a number of processes from the Italian Public Administration. For each process the corresponding BPMN 2.0 [42] business process model has been considered and in- depth analyzed in order to discover, identify, and classify recurrent concepts, patterns and constructions. In order to select the processes, we adopted the following criteria: a) the capability of accessing the processes, b) accuracy and completeness, and ﬁnally c) the source of the processes. In essence, we needed processes which were available in their complete deﬁnition, without leaving any relevant

Learn PAd FP7-619583 4 Figure 2.1: Organizational behavior related organizational learning aspects out of the speciﬁcation. In addition, the reliability of the source must have been assured: the processes are directly derived from the Italian Public Administration. The outcome of this detailed examination is summarized in Sect.6 and consists of a taxonomy of generic and recurrent concepts relevant in the context of process-aware organizations. The analysis has been arranged around the iterative process depicted in Fig. 2.2 and consists of the following stages:

• Select Process A business process from the Italian Public Administration is considered from the following list

a) family reunion, b) grant citizenship, and ﬁnally c) bouncer registration.

• Identify Relevant Concepts The most recurrent concepts are identiﬁed.

• Classify Concepts The identiﬁed concepts are classiﬁed in order to highlight their common aspects.

• Refine Classification The classified concepts are added to the overall classification in case their are not already considered; once finished next process is considered.

Figure 2.2: The analysis process

Learn PAd FP7-619583 5 2.3. The Considered Processes

The analysis has been performed on three different processes on the Italian Public Administration, which are described in the sequel. The processes have been selected by consulting documents ([10, 44]) and by interviewing people in the Universita` degli Studi di Camerino ([11]). Both the authors of the mentioned documents and the interviewed people were analyzing different processes and the corresponding organization at the Regione Marche and at other major Public Administrations (Prefectures, Ministry of Finance, Police, etc).

2.3.1. Process P1: Family Reunion

The integrity of the family is protected under international law. There is universal consensus that, as the fundamental unit of society, the family is entitled to respect and protection1. A right to family unity is inherent in recognizing the family as a group unit; if members of the unit do not have a right to live together, there is not a family to respect or protect2. In accordance with these principles, in 1986 the first immigration legislation was promulgated in Italy as a result of the large number of applications submitted by foreigners in order to be reunite with their relatives. The law went through several changes before the current version. The latest changes have been made by the legislative decree of 3 October 2008, n. 160 and then by Law 94/2009 of 15 July 2009 (“Disposizioni in Materia di Sicurezza Pubblica”). Several participants are involved in the delivery of this service. The beneficiaries are both the foreigner, which applies for family reunion (or a patronage that acts on his/her behalf), and the family member to be reunited as described in Table 2.1. Whereas the different administrations involved in the service delivery are described in Table 2.2. In order to support the process the Department for Civil Liberties and Immigration of the Ministry of Interior designed and deployed a “one stop shop” service for immigration, named SPI. The beneficiary are allowed to electronically submit and verify their application by means of an information system which is adopted by all the 106 Italian prefectures. The procedure outlined in Fig. 2.3 consists by the SPI activities as described in the following:

1The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, article 16(3), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, article 23(1), and American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, article 17(1) each state that The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State. European Social Charter, 1961, article 16, With a view to ensuring the necessary conditions for the full development of the family, which is a fundamental unit of society, the Contracting Parties undertake to promote the economic, legal and social protection of family life . African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, 1981, article 18(1) The family shall be the natural unit and basis of society. It shall be protected by the State which shall take care of its physical and moral health. 2Human Rights Committee, 39th Session, 1990, General Comment 19 on Article 23, paragraph 5.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 6 Roles Actors Duties (B1) Foreign nationals resident in Italy He/she must have a residence permit for work, asylum, study, religious reasons or family, or are already in pos- session of a residence permit, maintain or regain the family unit. (B2) Foreign nationals He/she must fall in either of the following cases:

– the spouse not legally separated and older than 18 years;

– the spouse or minor children also born out of wed- lock, unmarried, provided that the other parent, if any, has given his consent;

– dependent children, if they can not provide for their needs in life for their health conditions that lead to total disability;

– dependent parents who do not have other children in their country of origin or provenance, or parents over sixty-ﬁve, if other children are unable to support them for documented, serious health reasons.

Table 2.1: Beneﬁciaries involved in the Family Reunion process

Figure 2.3: A high-level ﬂow-chart of the reunion process.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 7 Roles Actors Duties (A1) Prefecture It is the main driver of the process, on behalf of the Department for Civil Liberties and Immigration of the Ministry of Interior according to the geographical location of the applicant. (A2) Police It is in charge of public security controls and they give opinions on the feasibility of the application. (A3) Consulate or Embassy They are the Italian authorities abroad responsible for verifying the subjective requirements. (A4) Ministry of Foreign Affairs It communicates the results of the procedure to the Italian authorities located in the state of the requesting beneﬁciary. (A5) Ministry of Finance It holds the responsibility of releasing the ﬁscal code for the incoming relative.

Table 2.2: Administrations involved in the Family Reunion process

1) The BP starts with a reunion application done by beneﬁciaries living in Italy using a downloadable software client freely available after registration.

2) The application is managed by the SPI and assigned to a prefecture that asks, for public safety constraints, to the Police Headquarters and then invites the beneﬁciary to the Prefecture in order to check her/his status. Both the opinions from police and Prefecture may be cause of application rejection. Otherwise in case of acceptance the Ministry of Foreign Affairs provides the go-ahead (nulla osta).

3) After the release of the nulla-osta the relative that has to be reunited goes to the Italian consulate or embassy in her/his country, and proving some speciﬁc requirements asks or VISA in order to be admitted in Italy.

4) Once in Italy the foreigner must go (within eight days) to the Prefecture in order to register his/her arrival in Italy, to receive the ﬁscal code, thanks to the interaction with the Ministry of Finance, and to ﬁnally obtain the residence permit.

In Fig. 2.4 a draw of Business Process is illustrated3.

3For the sake of clarity, the ﬁgure can be displayed at full resolution from http://wiki.learnpad.eu/LearnPAdWiki/ bin/view/Deliverables/D3_1_Figures/

Learn PAd FP7-619583 8 Figure 2.4: Family reunion Business Process modelling

2.3.2. Process P2: Grant Citizenship

Citizenship is the status of a person recognised under the custom or law of a state that bestows on that person (called a citizen) the rights and the duties of citizenship. A person may have multiple citizenships and a person who does not have citizenship of any state is said to be stateless. Grant citizenship is a service to be used by foreigners and stateless persons to ask for Italian citizenship. Several partecipants are involved in this service. The beneﬁciary is the foreigner, who applies for Italian citizenship as described in Table 2.3; the providers are the different Public Administrations involved in the service delivery and are described in Table 2.4.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 9 Figure 2.5: A high-level ﬂow-chart of the citizenship process.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 10 In order to support the process the Department for Civil Liberties and Immigration of the Ministry of Interior decided to develop an electronic system, named SICITT. The system manages requests and documentations for granting citizen-ship and satisﬁes the needs of the Ministry of Interior to obtain the opinions by means other ofﬁces involved in the grant citizenship process. It is in use in all the Prefectures and in almost every police-headquarters. The main steps of the BP are described in the following:

1) The process starts with a request done by the foreigner by ordinary mail or delivered by hand to the Prefecture. The SICITT foresees that an employee uploads the request.

2) Document veriﬁcation is the second step, and the following conditions could hold.

1) The prefecture asks to complete the documentation in the case some documents are miss- ing. Then the applicant has to produce and delivery the required documents to the Prefec- ture, otherwise the citizenship office begins the procedure for instance rejection. 2) The prefecture notifies a possible rejection of the request if some requirement are not satisfied. In 30 days the applicant has to solve such condition otherwise the request will be classified as inadmissible.

3) On the other side when all the documents are provided and all the requirements are satisﬁed the following steps are considered.

• The request is recorded in SICITT and it becomes visible to the police-headquarters that checks if there is any impediment, and then expresses an opinion. If the Prefecture does not receive the police-headquarters opinion in 6 months, it solicits the office. • Only after receiving the opinion of the police-headquarters, the Prefecture sends its opinion to the Ministry of Interior. At the same time the SICITT automatically sends a request for information to other offices: AISE, AISI, Ministry of Justice (criminal record), MAE and to the department of the anti-crime police. • Only after receiving all the opinions, the Ministry of Interior verifies the instance and it can decide to: 1) Ask for an integration of the documents; 2) Start the procedure for the rejection of the instance; 3) Confirm grant citizenship. Any final decision is sent to the Prefecture that is in charge to notify the applicant about the decision. • In case of confirmation, the Prefecture asks to the municipality to call the applicant for the oath. Only after applicant sworn the process is closed.

In Fig. 2.6 a draw of Family Reunion process is illustrated4. . It shows by means of a well known notations of BPMN 2.0 syntax, the process ﬂow. The process start with the user’s request and go on by the interactions among the Public Administration ofﬁces and the response to the citizen.

4The ﬁgure can be displayed at full resolution from http://wiki.learnpad.eu/LearnPAdWiki/bin/view/ Deliverables/D3_1_Figures/

Learn PAd FP7-619583 11 Figure 2.6: Grant Citizenship Business Process modelling

2.3.3. Process P3: Bouncer registration

The bouncer is a person who work in the field of private security, usually prevent troublemakers from premises open to the public. In Italy, the legal basis for category bouncer is formalized in art.94 law July, 15 2009 (”Provisions regarding public safety” 5) that introduced the possibility to employ staff that supervises the entertainment activities in order to secure the life of the bystander6. In Italy, the Ministry of Interior emitted the decree of October, 6 2009 that formalizes specific requirements that all the Italian bouncers have to satisfy in order to sign in the corresponding registry. Several participants are involved in the provisioning of such a service. The beneficiaries are the managers of public place or vigilance institute that do the request, and the bouncer who will be registered in the list. The providers are the different Public Administrations involved in the service delivery as following: • Prefecture, on behalf of the Department of Public Security of the Ministry of Interior according to the geographical location of the place, has to receive the request and decides for granting or rejecting decree. • The Police headquarters and several police departments such as Police anti-crime, General In- vestigation division and Special Operation (Italian acronym DIGOS) that give their opinions. To guarantee the process the Department of Public Security of the Ministry of Interior is developing an application, named BTF, to electronically manage the requests of inscription in the bouncers registry. Up to now the BTF is going to be used by all the Prefectures and the police-headquarters, but it is expected that in a second phase it will support a fully interactive service.

5Gazzetta Ufﬁciale della Repubblica Italiana n. 170 July, 24 2009 6Art. 3 paragraph 7 law July, 15 2009, n. 94

Learn PAd FP7-619583 12 1) The process starts with a request delivered by hand or by ordinary mail, from a manager of a public place or of a vigilance institute, to the Prefecture in charge to manage it. The request is successively uploaded into the BTF manually by the PA employee.

2) The Prefecture proceeds with the documents veriﬁcation, it may happen that the documentation is incomplete. In this case it asks for integration to the applicant.

3) When the documentation is complete, the Prefecture analyzes it and then waits for the opinion from the police-headquarters that has to come within two weeks. If the Prefecture does not receive the opinion, it has to solicit the police-headquarters.

4) Before giving the opinion, the police-headquarters asks to other police ofﬁces, Police anti-crime and DIGOS, for receiving more information about the bouncer.

5) After receiving all the opinions from all the police-headquarters, the Prefecture decides the instance. If it is positive the inscription in the list of bouncers is authorized, otherwise the request is rejected.

Figure 2.7: A high-level ﬂow-chart of bouncer registration process.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 13 In Fig. 2.8 a draw of Bouncer registration process is illustrated7.

Figure 2.8: Bouncer Registration Business Process modelling

2.4. Models for Supporting Learning Processes in Public Administrations

While the speciﬁcation of business processes is usually done by means of standard notations, most of the processes in the Public Administration are knowledge-intensive. In order to increase transparency and information tracing in this kind of processes, it is of crucial relevance making knowledge relevant in a given process explicit to better support the learner. Therefore, the Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) [34] has been considered with some necessary adaptations in order to deal with partiality of information and some intrinsic uncertainty. Another aspect which is relevant for the Learn PAd objectives is the necessity to consider business goals and success factors, which are usually represented in a motivation model. For the motivation model we build on the Business Motivation Model [37] (BMM). Also the way an organization is arranged and how this organizational structure is capable of enacting the process is another aspect which has been considered by means of the Organisational Model and Competency Model. All these notations are taken into account in Sect.3 and in Sect.4. Since, modeling notations are usually given in terms of meta-models a brief introduction to meta-modeling and Model-Driven Engineering is given in the next section.

2.4.1. Models and Meta-models in MDE

Model-Driven Engineering [45] (MDE) refers to the systematic use of models as first class entities throughout the software engineering life cycle. Model-driven approaches shift development focus from third generation programming language codes to models expressed in proper domain specific modeling languages. The objective is to increase productivity and reduce time to market by enabling the development of complex systems by means of models defined with concepts that are much less bound to the underlying implementation technology and are much closer to the problem domain. This makes the

7The ﬁgure can be displayed at full resolution from http://wiki.learnpad.eu/LearnPAdWiki/bin/view/ Deliverables/D3_1_Figures/

Learn PAd FP7-619583 14 models easier to specify, understand, and maintain [47] helping the understanding of complex problems and their potential solutions through abstractions. The concept of Model Driven Engineering emerged as a generalization of the Model Driven Architec- ture (MDA) proposed by the Object Management Group (OMG) in 2001 [30] and it relies on a conceptual framework mainly consisting of model, meta-model, and model transformation. Even though MDA and MDE rely on models that are considered “first class citizens”, there is no common agreement about what a model is. In [46] a model is defined as “a set of statements about a system under study”. Bezivin´ and Gerbe´ in [1] define a model as “a simplification of a system built with an intended goal in mind. The model should be able to answer questions in place of the actual system”. According to Mellor et al. [27] a model “is a coherent set of formal elements describing something (e.g., a system, bank, phone, or train) built for some purpose that is amenable to a particular form of analysis” such as communication of ideas between people and machines, test case generation, transformation into an implementation, etc. The MDA guide [30] defines a model of a system as “a description or specification of that system and its environment for some certain purposes. A model is often presented as a combination of drawings and text. The text may be in a modeling language or in a natural language”. These formulations do not conflict but rather complement one another and represent the various aspects of the fundamental philosophical category of software. Models are generally used in order to pursue the following purposes (amongst others):

• to record design decisions, models are generally existing prior to software and are used either to convey relevant information to the implementors or to be manipulated in tool chains; the outcome consists in both cases of artefacts, which can range from documentation and component interfaces to software skeletons or full-ﬂedged systems. The process typically enriches subsequent models with details which derive from the knowledge the manipulations rely on, regardless whether automated or manual;

• to analyze a system, highly abstract and incomplete models are veriﬁed possibly using a computer to analyze the system for the presence of desirable properties and the absence of undesirable ones. This can be done in several ways, including formal (mathematical) analyses such as performance analysis based on queuing theory or safety-and-liveness property checking. The analyses can be performed before or after the system comes into existence depending on the needs.

Techniques and tools to support model-driven engineering nowadays reached a certain degree of maturity making it practical even in large-scale industrial applications. For a detailed discussion about the use and meaning of models in MDE please refer to [2]. In MDE models are not considered as mere documentation but precise artifacts that can be understood by computers and can be automatically manipulated. In this scenario meta-modeling plays a key role. It is intended as a common technique for deﬁning the abstract syntax of models and the interrelationships between model elements. Meta- modeling can be seen as the construction of a collection of “concepts” (things, terms, etc.) within a certain domain. A model is an abstraction of phenomena in the real world, and a meta-model is yet another abstraction, highlighting properties of the model itself. This model is said to conform to its meta- model like a program conforms to the grammar of the programming language in which it is written [2]. For instance, Fig. 2.9.a depicts a sample meta-model containing the concepts and the relations proper of graphs. In this respect, the meta-model contains the concept Node which represents a source and/or target of edges according to the relations between the Node and Edge metaclasses. In Fig. 2.9.b two sample models conforming to graph meta-models previous mentioned are reported.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 15 (a) Graph Meta-model

(b) Graph models

Figure 2.9: Models conforming to a sample meta-model

OMG has introduced the four-level architecture illustrated in Fig. 2.10. At the bottom level, the M0 layer is the real system. A model represents this system at level M1. This model conforms to its meta- model defined at level M2 and the meta-model itself conforms to the meta meta-model at level M3. The meta meta-model conforms to itself. OMG has proposed Meta Object Facility (MOF) [35] as a standard for specifying meta-models. For example, the Unified Modeling Language (UML) meta-model [33] is defined in terms of MOF. A supporting standard of MOF is XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) [41], which defines an XML-based exchange format for models on the M3, M2, or M1 layer. This meta-modeling architecture is common to other technological spaces as discussed by Kurtev et al. in [23]. For example, the organization of programming languages and the relationships between XML documents and XML schemas follow the same principles described above (see Fig. 2.10).

Figure 2.10: The four layers meta-modeling architecture

2.4.2. Models in Learn PAd

Figure 2.11 illustrates the overall representation of the Learn PAd platform where products and dependencies at the work package level are outlined. According to the Learn PAd DoW, WP3 will play a key role to deﬁne a model-based framework for specifying and managing rigorous models able to represent in a homogeneous manner the whole lifecycle of the learning projects. In Fig. 2.11 we represent the main elements of the Learn PAd platform focusing on Business Meta-model analysis in order to perform learning activities and knowledge representation. Using such meta-models the Learn PAd platform will permit, on the one side to model and document PA processes, on the other side to provide learning material and to reason about learner, contents and KPI. In this deliverable our aim is to analyze the domain-speciﬁc meta-models that are the glue artefacts for all WP engaged in Learn PAd project. Our work consist to identifying the objects and relationships that are needed to be modeled for the management and learning of business processes in order to

Learn PAd FP7-619583 16 Figure 2.11: Learn PAd platform overall representation capture the most relevant information that is used while managing business processes in the domain of Public Administrations. The identified elements and artefacts are aligned with existing (standard) meta models and modeling languages for business process management, in particular the OMG standards BPMN, BMM, Organizational Model and Enterprise Architecture modelling tools like Adonis Enterprise Architect. Furthermore, approaches for modeling KPIs and relating them to business processes will be analyzed. Such meta-models analysis has to be made according to an iterative process 2.2 of elicitation of new concepts from the considered domain and the outcome will be a number of interrelated concepts able to be used for the specification and analysis of business. Specifically, standard notations for Business Modeling will be extended in order to directly support such features. In addition, models can be organized using a multi-scale views with different levels of abstraction. Thus, the base for teaching/learning the multiple aspects of the process rely on the data contents over the multiple views, see examples in Sect.3. In next sections, a detailed discussion about the knowledge management and associated learning processes is provided. In particular, the knowledge needed for learning is presented in terms of modeling notation in orthogonal description with respect to the business processes presented in this section.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 17 Roles Actors Duties (B1) Foreign granted He/she must have the following requirements: citizenship by marriage (art. 5, law February, 5 – the applicant, a foreign or stateless person, must be married 1992 n. 91) to an Italian citizen and reside legally in Italy for at least 2 years after the marriage;

– if the spouses reside abroad, the application may be made after three years from the date of marriage;

These terms are reduced by half in the presence of children born or adopted by the spouses. (B2) For residence in Italy He/she must fall in either of the following cases: (art. 9, law February, 5 1992 n.91) – the foreigner whose father or mother or one of the direct ancestors of the second degree were citizens by birth or was born in the territory of the Italian Republic and, in both cases, there is a legal resident for at least three years;

– at the foreigner adopted by an Italian citizen resident in Ital- ian territory at least ﬁve years after the adoption;

– the foreigner who has served, even abroad, for at least ﬁve years in the employ of the Italian Republic;

– the citizen of a State UE if legally resident for at least four years in Italy;

– stateless and refugee who is a legal resident for at least ﬁve years in Italy;

– the foreigner residing legally for at least 10 years in the Ital- ian territory.

(B3) Automatically acquired Minor children of a person who acquires or reacquires Italian citizenship, if lives with it, acquire automatically Italian citizenship (B4) Election of citizenship The foreign born in Italy, who has resided legally without interrup- tion until she/his reach the age of majority, may indicate to elect Italian citizenship within one year from this date.

Table 2.3: Beneﬁciaries involved in the Italian citizenship process

Learn PAd FP7-619583 18 Roles Actors Duties (A1) Prefecture It is is the main actor and drives the process, receiving the request, checking the requirements and giving the opinion; (A2) Ministry of Interior It receives electronically the request and the documentation, checks them, evaluates the instance and took the final decision; (A3) The Municipality It officiates to the new citizen sworn; (A4) Police headquarters, They give their opinions on the application. Ministry of Justice and public security offices such as Information Agency and External Security (AISE), Information Agency and Internal Security (AISI)

Table 2.4: Administrations involved in the grant Citizenship process

Learn PAd FP7-619583 19 Learn PAd FP7-619583 20 3 Knowledge Management and Associated Learn- ing Processes

According to Merriam Webster1 learning is ”the activity or process of gaining knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something: the activity of someone who learns.” Weidong Pan et al. [43] differentiate between objectivist and constructivist learning. Whereas objectivist theory for learning believes that knowledge can be transmitted to learners, constructivist theory deems that knowledge must be constructed individually. Hence, a learning system ”should provide learners with a wide range of services to assist and facilitate knowledge construction, rather than imposing a particular learning method on them” ([43], p. 735). In Learn PAd we support constructivist learning by engaging learners in complex, authentic and collaborative learning activities, as suggested by [22]. Hernandez-Leo et al. ([16]) stress the importance of ﬂexible, effective and customizable Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) activities on the one hand side and structured designs on the other hand side. Learn PAd covers both sides since the learning process is tightly coupled with the – at least partly – structured business process about which knowledge is to be acquired and at the same time offering ﬂexibility in the type of learning and way of collaboration. Hence, we need (meta) models to describe the learning processes, the business processes, business goals, critical success factors, performance indicators, roles, competencies, documents and data (application data, performance data, comment data etc.), and relations between these models. Figure 3.1 gives an exemplary overview on these models; detailed descriptions are provided below. For some model types graphical representation already exists, e.g. for process models, whereas for others graphical representations are to be developed (e.g. for competencies).

3.1. Knowledge Needed for Learning in the Context of Business Processes

However, today prevailing in organizations be it enterprises or Public Administrations is the business process model, often represented in BPMN as detailed in Section2. Nevertheless, it isnt the only model relevant for describing enterprise architecture. Although often no standard is used for the description, e.g. for organization charts, no graphical representation is chosen, e.g. for deﬁning an organizations vision and mission this knowledge exists and is needed to run the business. Hence, in addition to the analysis of the business process models illustrated in the previous section we introduce additional model types to represent the aforementioned knowledge explicitly wherever possible based on standards and show how the different models are interrelated and how the will be used for learning in Learn PAd.

1”Learning.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 June 2014. ¡http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/learning.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 21 Figure 3.1: Exemplary Overview of Models Needed to Describe Learning

Starting from the business process model, the central model depicted in Fig. 3.1 is the Business Process Model (1, Business Process Model), represented in an extended BPMN 2.0. For modelling knowledge intensive (sub-)processes (2) the Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN 1.0) is used. KPIs are derived from business goals and critical success factors; hence a Business Motivation Model (3, BMM) is needed. Organisational units, roles and persons are modelled in an extra Organi- sation Model (4, Org. Model) to allow for more expressiveness than ’BPMN native’ pools and lanes. In order to support learning competencies are modelled and required by roles. The Competency Model (5) is for describing learners level of competencies, learning progress, etc. Finally a Document Model (6) is depicted, comprising application documents and data, learning reports etc. This is also an enhancement to BPMN 2.0. Having an extra Document Model allows for better representing content, e.g. classifying documents, building document hierarchies, deter-mine dependencies etc.) In the following sections details on the models, respectively on the meta models are provided.

(1) BP Model

To explain the general principles of supporting learning in Learn PAd a simple business process was modelled, as depicted in Fig. 3.2. The modelling language is BPMN 2.0 [42], extended by non-standard object types, e.g. representing input and output (documents) of activity, roles and key performance indicators. This is done to avoid ambiguity and to make process and business knowledge explicit in order to provide transparency to the learner and to better support learning (cf. Sect. 3.2).

Learn PAd FP7-619583 22 Figure 3.2: Business Process ’Process Customer Application’

The process ’Proof of customer application’ consists of 4 tasks. Three are depicted as ”simple” activities in BPMN 2.0 notation (’Check Customer Application’, ’Accept Application’ and ’Reject Appli- cation’); one is depicted as ad hoc sub process (’Check Application Details’). The ad hoc sub process is considered to be a knowledge intensive task (see Sect. 2.1). Two information objects are depicted: ’Customer Application’ (input for ’Check Customer Application’ and ’Check Application Details’) and ’Evaluation Report’ (output of ’Check Customer Application’ and ’Check Application Details’ and input for ’Accept Application’ and ’Reject Application’). After the ﬁrst activity ’Check Customer Application’ a decision is taken whether further details of the application should be checked. If so the ad hoc sub process ’Check Application Details’ is called. All activities are optional and can be repeated until the end condition is met. In this example the ad hoc process ends when a decision report is created (and submitted). Knowledge intensive (sub-) processes are of particular interest for learners since often they are demanding e.g. due to their discretionary tasks. Discretionary tasks are tasks that are available to users, to be applied in addition, to their discretion (cf. the next section on Case Management Models). Figure 3.2 further depicts objects not explicitly modeled today: First, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are introduced. Although often not graphically represented in process models today KPIs are necessary for assessing performance of activities and processes. We aim to make all relevant knowledge explicit and hence attached KPI to activities and to the process as a whole. For simplicity only time related KPIs are depicted. Evaluation of the process performance – and hence of the learner’s performance – can be done based on these KPIs. KPIs are derived from a Business Motivation Model, as detailed in the BMM section below and depicted as target, e.g. ’execution time ≤ 1 h’, related to activity ’Check Customer Application’. Also depicted in Fig. 3.2 are the roles involved in an activity, e.g. ’Citizen Center Ofﬁcer’, responsible for executing activity ’Check Customer Application’, depicted as tiny ’R Role Name’ below the activity. Using an explicit model, the Organisational Model, instead of lanes allows, as shown in the process models in Section2, to model more details on roles, e.g. the kind of responsibility a role has in a certain activity. Furthermore, ambiguity of pool and lane objects types is avoided. The little ingoing or outgoing arrow indicates documents relevant for an activity. For example ’Cus- tomer Application’ is input for the activity ’Check Customer Application’ and ’Acceptance Letter’ is output

Learn PAd FP7-619583 23 of the activity ’Accept Application’. With this modelling, the documents in the BPMN would be superﬂu- ous. We additionally represent documents in BPMN here to make them more visible. Figure 3.2 also shows information on the probability of paths, i.e. the probability that the sub-process ’Check Application Details’ is to be executed is 80%, the probability for accepting an application is 70%. This information is used for analysis and simulation.

(2) CM Model

As shown in above today business process models do not explicitly deal with knowledge intensive tasks. A general approach is to model such an activity as a manual task (cf. the many manual tasks depicted in the process models depicted in Section2) and leave execution and completion of such a task to the user. Thus the user is not supported and his/her actions arent known to users, i.e. they cant beneﬁt from the experience gained in previous processes. For modelling knowledge intensive (sub- )processes the Case Management Model and Notation, CMMN V 1.0 [34] is used. For Learn PAd we enhance the CMMN by two object types: discretionary document and planning table for discretionary document. In Fig. 3.3 this is shown for task ’Report Result’ with the three discretionary documents ’Guidelines’, ’Template’ and ’Former Reports’. Use of discretionary documents is equivalent to the use of discretionary tasks.

Figure 3.3: Sub-Process ’Check Application Details’ represented in enhanced CMMN

Reason for this enhancement again is making knowledge relevant in a business process explicit to better support the learner (increasing transparency and contextualize information provision). Fig- ure 3.3 depicts three tasks (according to CMMN represented by a rectangle shape with rounded corners: ’Check tax information on customer’, ’Check customer’s domicile’ and ’Report results’. All tasks have entry criteria, depicted as diamonds, that determine at runtime if a task is to be executed or not (entry criteria are shown as notes above the tasks). In addition Fig. 3.3 shows four discretionary tasks, depicted by a rectangle shape with dashed lines and rounded corners (’Check tax system’, ’Ask tax ofﬁcer’, ’Check directory information’ and ’Ask registration’). Discretionary tasks are tasks that are available to user, to be applied in addition, to his/her discretion. The two object types, by which we enhanced CMMN, are depicted as black-and-white striped rectangle (to indicate availability

Learn PAd FP7-619583 24 of discretionary documents) and rectangle with dashed lines and a document icon for representing the discretionary documents. Although not depicted in Fig. 3.3, KPIs can be deﬁned for the sub-process and its tasks, too. Fig- ure 3.4 shows the business process ’Process Customer Application’ with its opened sub-process ’Check Application Details’.

Figure 3.4: Business Process ’Process Customer Application’ and opened Sub-Process ’Check Application Details’

(3) BMM

As shown in Fig. 3.2 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are defined for activities and for the process as a whole. KPIs are derived from business goals and success factors, represented in a motivation model. For the motivation model we build on the Business Motivation Model [31], in short BMM. Its core concepts are categorised into end, means, influencer, assessment and potential impact. Associations to business process (business process model) and organisational unit (organisational model) are also indicated ([31], p.76). Since BMM is intended to determine strategic issues operational objects like KPIs arent considered yet. Furthermore, up to now no graphical representation is available: the relations as well as the graphical representation will be developed within Learn PAd. Particularly in Public Administrations BMM is rarely available. Since service delivery is determined by law explicit models are spared. Figure 3.5 shows the BMM as defined by [31]. The recommended business vocabulary will be determined in the Learn PAd ontology.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 25 Figure 3.5: BMM Overview ([31], p. 12)

(4) Organisational Model

Most often organization models are represented in hierarchical charts. Also not explicitly mentioned in section 2 those charts are available in all Public Administrations and frequently presented to the public on the web. Figure 3.6 depicts a simple example of an organisational model of the Public Administration A. Shown are two organisational units ’Citizen Center’ and ’Tax Office’. To provide the services of the ’Citizen Center’ the role (R) ’City Center Officer’ is needed. In the example the role is as-signed to two persons ’Charly Brown’ and ’Barnaby Dogs’. Persons may have additional roles, not related to an organisational unit, like ’Business Expert’, ’Business Process Modeller’ and ’Business Novice’. What is shown in Fig. 3.6 as notes related to the icons of users (information on job descriptions and learner’s profile) will be replaced by specific object types of the Competency Model to be developed in Learn PAd (see the following section).

(5) Competency Model

In Public Administrations and enterprises alike, competencies are most often described within job descriptions but not deﬁned in speciﬁc models. However, for modelling learning a competency model is necessary. The Learn PAd Competency Model will be based on the framework the European Commit- tee for standardisation, CEN WS-LT LTSO (Learning Technology Standards Observatory)2 , driven by 9 international institutions and organizations involved in the standardization of E-learning technologies with about 200 experts. The framework of competency data includes:

• Reusable (generic) deﬁnition of the competency

2CEN WS-LT Learning Technology Standards Observatory. URL: http://www.cen-ltso.net/Main.aspx. Main contact: Uni- versity of Vigo 36213 SPAIN.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 26 Figure 3.6: Example of Organisational Model

• Context within which the competency is deﬁned or that deﬁnes the competency

• Evidence of competency such as assessment results, time, date, method of evaluation

• Dimensions with regard to context (a person’s level of interest in a competency, the importance or weight placed on a competency for a position) or evidence (proﬁciency level on one or more scales) ([8], p. 7).

Based on the above conceptual models CEN ([8], p. 7) identiﬁes the main components of the competency problem space for which information models are important, namely:

• Competency deﬁnitions that should provide a standardised means for representing the key characteristics of educational and work related competencies or goals

• Competency records that hold context, evidence and dimension information with regard to an individual’s acquired and desired competencies

• Job deﬁnitions that can be compiled by means of reuse of existing competency deﬁnitions.

As stated in the ISO/IEC TR 24763 technical report on information technology – learning, education and training ([20], p. vii), ”There are currently several existing and implemented models providing competency information related to learner knowledge, skills, capabilities, qualiﬁcations, performance, learning objectives, and other related objects.” ISO/IEC TR 24763 provides an information technology for learning, education and training (ITLET) Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) that comprises concepts (and their attributes), and relationships as depicted in Fig. 3.7. The Learn PAd competency model

Learn PAd FP7-619583 27 and its relations to other models, e.g. the business process model or the organisation model will draw upon these deﬁnitions.

Figure 3.7: The ITLET Conceptual Reference Model for Competency Information and Related Objects ([20], p. 7)

(6) Document Model

Instead of using the BPMN 2.0 data object element for modeling information/documents used in a process, e.g. as input or output for an activity in Learn PAd we use a separate model, as explained above. This allows for defining a data object (and its meta data) once, and for adding more details, e.g. providing references to operative templates or guidelines. Figure 3.8 depicts an example of a document model. The folder icon depicts a file or a document. Files and documents may be related and can be referenced from other models as from a business process model. In Sect. 3.1 we introduced knowledge, represented in several specific (meta) models, relevant for learning. How this knowledge is used in learning, supported by the Learn PAd system is described in the following section.

3.2. Input for learning

In Learn PAd we distinguish between three types of learning:

• individual learning off-line; the notion of this type of learning is of a ’try run’, e.g. a new employee may learn how a process is executed in general

• navigating and exploring models and content, i.e. process and business logic • performing a simulation

Learn PAd FP7-619583 28 Figure 3.8: Document Model

• individual learning on-line; the notion of this type of learning is of learning by doing, e.g. a civil servant performs his/her daily work guided by the process model provided in the Learn PAd platform (i.e. the Wiki)

• executing processes and retrieving process and business knowledge on run time • commenting on the execution (on process and business logic) • requesting changes (of process or business logic), e.g. correcting an error or improving s.th.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 29 • performing changes, e.g. changing a document that is input for a task • receiving recommendations from the Learn PAd system

• organisational learning; the notion of this type of learning is of beneﬁting from contribution of others

• sharing experiences with non-routine cases between individuals • translating individual experiences into recommendations for model improvements (process and business models)

In the following input for learning of each type is described.

3.2.1. Input for individual learning

For individual learning - be it on-line or off-line - a learner’s proﬁle is required. Figure 3.9 depicts the business process for creating and updating a learner’s proﬁle.

Figure 3.9: Business Process for Creating and Updating Learner’s Proﬁle

A learner’s profile expresses competency data associated to a learner. The European Model for Learner Competencies ([8]) differs between required competencies (as defined for example in a job description) and acquired competencies an individual gains through his/her participation in learning. Figure 3.10 gives an example of competency data accommodating elements and structures as defined by the European Committee For Standardization [8]. That is to say, that for each individual the required competencies, the actual level of competency and the expected level of competency must be defined. We assume that in the context of Learn PAd, learning is always process related. Thus, in addition to a learner’s profile input for learning is also the processes, respectively the activities a learner is responsible for. This information can be derived from the organisational model, in which roles are assigned to the user (i.e. learner) and further the processes and activities a role is responsible for.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 30 Figure 3.10: Learner’s Proﬁle ([8], p. 19)

Individual learning off-line

Figure 3.11 depicts the general process of individual learning off-line, represented in BPMN. Since several types of simulation are possible, ﬁrst activity after the learner starts the learning process is to determine the desired simulation.

Figure 3.11: Process for Individual Learning Off-Line

After this, three activities are performed in parallel:

Learn PAd FP7-619583 31 • Retrieve Process Model Within this activity all processes the learner is involved in are displayed; this is done - as explained above - based on the roles a user has. Since to each activity not only the role and its responsibility is attached but also the kind of responsibility, e.g. responsible for execution, approving results, cooperation/ participation or information, according learning scenarios can be set up for simulation

• Retrieve Simulation Data As information objects (e.g. an application form) are modeled in a separate document model simulation data can easily be linked.

• Retrieve Learner’s Proﬁle The learner’s proﬁle is retrieved to determine level of competency, learning goals etc. as detailed in the section above.

Next activity in the off-line learning process is to ’Set Up Simulation’. Within this activity the learner selects the business process (or activity) in which he/she wants to improve his/her performance. Based on the learner’s profile the actual and the required competencies determined. Based on the learner’s competencies and responsibilities simulation data is selected. For example: if a novice has to check a customer’s application for the first time, his/her responsibility is to approve the application and his/her acquired level of competency is low, simple application data will be selected for simulation. Whereas, if a learner has a higher level of acquired competency complex application data can be chosen. For reporting the learning progress a performance record is created that is updated during the learning process until it ends. Within the global sub-process ’Learning Assessment’ the learner’s performance is evaluated; input is the learner’s profile and the performance record. Then an evaluation report is issued that builds the basis for updating the learner’s profile as depicted in Fig. 3.12. Evaluation of the learner’s performance is based on the process performance, i.e. is done based on the KPIs defined for the process, respectively its activities. For example:

• Is an activity performed within or below the given time?

• Is an ad hoc sub processes performed within or below the given time?

• Is the whole process performed within or below the given time?

Same evaluation can be done for other time related KPIs (e.g. waiting time, resting time), cost related KPIs (what employee at what costs executed the task) and must be done for quality related KPIs, e.g. customer satisfaction regarding his/her satisfaction with the application handling.

Figure 3.12: Global Sub-Process for Assessing Learning

Learn PAd FP7-619583 32 Individual learning on-line

Figure 3.13 depicts the general process of individual learning on-line, represented in BPMN. Instead of a simulation the real business process, respectively the activity a learner is responsible for, is started. Instead of simulation data real data is provided, e.g. data of a real customer application. The learner’s actions are monitored and reported in the performance record. During the execution learning is supported, e.g. giving recommendations like: • read guiding documents (e.g. guidelines for handling customer applications, legal regulations, cooperate governance guidelines or other cases) • ask an expert (e.g. providing a list of colleagues that can be asked by phone, mail, etc.) • selecting an activity (e.g. delegating the task to someone else). Also in the on-line learning process learning is assessed (within the global sub-process ’Learning Assessment’) and an evaluation report is issued. Again, evaluation of the learner’s performance is based on the process performance, i.e. is done based on the KPIs deﬁned for the process, respectively its activities.

Figure 3.13: Process for Individual Learning On-Line

Organisational Learning

Organisational learning is assumed if processes were improved (in order to gain monetary and non- monetary beneﬁts). Input for organisational learning can be: • collecting contributions (e.g. comments, actions etc.) to activities, analysing the contributions and translating individual experiences into recommendations for model improvements (process and business models) • direct improvements of business models made by the user while executing a task, e.g. information objects used in an activity can be changed (given the necessary authorisation) • process instances that can be mined in order to create (semi-automatically) suggestions for improvements

Learn PAd FP7-619583 33 • shared experiences with non-routine cases between individuals may enable employees to perform quicker.

In Sect. 3.2 we described the input for learning in Learn PAd. It was shown, that input for learning mainly comes from the business models, the process model, the document model, the organisational model individualized based on a learner’s proﬁle.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 34 4 Analysis of Modeling Languages and Practices

4.1. Process Logic: Structured Process and Case Management

A business process can be defined as a set of related business activities that create outcome of value to a customer. In many cases, this set of related business activities has a well-defined sequence, which results in clear primary (happy day) and alternative (rainy day) scenarios. Such processes are called structured processes. For specifying structured processes, Business Process Model and Notation [42] is widely used and considered to be a de facto standard. However, there are also a number of cases where the sequence of activities is not predefined and the performer decides based on the situation, his/her know-how, and existing guidance (policies and rules) when or whether a particular activity needs to be performed. Such processes are called ad hoc / unstructured processes. BPMN enables to define ad hoc processes and its internal activities. BPMN does not provide means for modeling the flow of activities in unstructured processes, thus recently another modeling standard - Case Management Model and Notation [34] has been proposed for that purpose. At the moment of writing this document, CMMN is a brand new modeling language, which is supported by only a few modeling environment and is not very widely used. However, it is quickly gaining popularity and is likely to become a de facto standard for modeling unstructured processes in the near future. In the following two sections, we will analyze potential application of BPMN and CMMN for Learn PAd purposes (see simplified examples given in Sect.3), i.e. specifying Public Administration (PA) business processes, using this is specification as a knowledge asset and a learning instrument.

4.2. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN)

4.2.1. Overview

Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) is a standard modeling language maintained by Object Management Management Group (OMG). The recent version of this standard is BPMN 2.0, which was released in 2011 (BPMN 2.0 spec). BPMN is designed to enable a better collaboration of business and software people. It provides a solid meta-model, which defines modeling constructs, their semantics and data properties than can be used for developing executable process models. It also provides a rich graphical notation, which enables business people to design and analyze business processes using a flow chart type graphs. BPMN provides multiple diagrams, which are designed for use by the business process modelers, see Fig. 4.1. Learn PAd aims to focus mostly on Process Diagrams that define private processes used in Public Administration offices. However, since there are many cases where specific Public Administration processes span multiple participating organizations, Collaboration and Choreography Diagrams will also be considered for defining global collaborative processes.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 35 Figure 4.1: Different types of diagrams provided by BPMN 2.0

BPMN provides businesses with the capability of understanding their internal business procedures in a graphical notation and enables communicating these procedures in a standard manner. BPMN follows the tradition of flowcharting notations for readability and flexibility. In addition, the BPMN execution semantics is fully formalized. This enables BPMN to combine readability, flexibility, and expandability. BPMN also provides business-to-business (B2B) process concepts, such as private, public and collaborative processes and choreographies. Figures 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 provide illustrative examples of private, public, collaborative and choreography views of the Public Administration process for granting citizenship, which was presented in the Sect.2.

Figure 4.2: An example of a public process, which represents the interactions between a private business process and another process or participant. Only those activities that are used to communicate to the other participant(s), plus the order of these activities, are included in the public process. All other internal activities of the private business process are not shown in the public process view.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 36 BPMN 2.0 also supports advanced modeling concepts, such as exception handling, transactions, and compensation. Most of these advanced capabilities wont be used in Learn PAd, which focuses on a descriptive level of business process modeling oriented towards business people to enable a more effective communication and learning by a collaborative management of business process knowledge.

Figure 4.3: An example of a private process that is internal to a speciﬁc organization

Figure 4.4: An example of choreography, which deﬁnes the expected behavior as a procedural contract between interacting participants. While a private process exists within a pool, a choreography exists between pools (or participants) and does not have a single control point.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 37 Figure 4.5: An example of collaborative business process diagram, which represents multiple interacting public processes that collaborate to achieve a speciﬁc goal

4.2.2. An Essential Subset of BPMN 2.0 for Modeling Public Administration Processes

BPMN 2.0 is a fairly rich and complex language, and it is unrealistic to expect that Public Administration officers or their customers will be able to learn and use the whole BPMN 2.0, which is defined in 538 pages long specification document. A pareto rule suggests that 80% of process modeling problems can be solved using 20% of BPMN capabilities. Thus for effective comprehension of business process models, it is necessary to define and adopt a small subset of essential BPMN 2.0 elements that enable specifying Public Administration processes at a certain abstraction level. According to a famous quote by Prof. George E. P. Box, all models are wrong, but some are useful. Learn PAd aims to describe processes at the abstraction level that is useful for learning purposes. Additional details about the process or its specific activity can be provided in textual descriptions that are contributed in a collaborative manner over the time by the PA officers who are applying the process in practice. BPMN 2.0 specification also recognizes the need for different levels of conformance for the modeling tools that claim to support BPMN 2.0. It defines Process Modeling Conformance and Process Execution Conformance classes. In Learn PAd, the focus is on the Process Modeling Conformance level, which has the following 3 conformance subclasses defined:

– Descriptive, which is concerned with visible elements and attributes used in high-level modeling. It should be comfortable for business people and business analysts who have experience in using ﬂowcharting tools and techniques for visualizing and analyzing business processes;

– Analytic, which contains all of Descriptive and in total about half of the constructs in the full Pro- cess Modeling Conformance class. It is based on experience gathered in BPMN training and an analysis of user-patterns in the Department of Defense Architecture Framework and planned standardization for that framework. Both Descriptive and Analytic focus on visible elements and

Learn PAd FP7-619583 38 a minimal subset of supporting attributes / elements that are stored in the model but typically are not visible in diagrams;

– Common Executable, which focuses on what is needed for executable process models.

Learn PAd aims to focus on applying the modeling constructs that are included in the Analytic conformance level as defined by BPMN 2.0 specification. However, many Analytic conformance level elements might appear to be of little use in Learn PAd and some of Common Executable conformance level elements might prove to be useful to specific Public Administration process models that are prepared for simulating business processes for learning purposes. While the official BPMN 2.0 conformance levels are oriented to modeling tool vendors, there are also specific practitioner initiatives in Public Administration domain, such as eCH [7] in Switzerland, which promotes a subset of BPMN for specifying eGovernment processes. No Magic Europe (NME), one of Learn PAd partners, is active in training and consulting on adopting BPMN 2.0 in various domains, including Public Administration (PA). NME recommends the following essential subset of BPMN for modeling private business processes, see Fig. 4.6. This subset includes only a few modeling constructs and is based on NME experience in training business people and Public Administration officers, one day is enough for learning the semantics of these BPMN elements and their notations as well as building initial skills for modeling business processes. The initial version of the suggested subset of BPMN elements is presented in Fig. 4.6.

The Table 4.1 provides brief descriptions of the essential elements of BPMN 2.0 recommended by NME plus several major concepts from global process modeling using collaborations and choreographies, which might be needed in Learn PAd project. A more detailed explanation of BPMN elements, their notations, and semantics, is well explained and illustrated with examples in multiple books on BPMN [49, 14].

4.2.3. Best Practices in Modeling Business Processes

While the essential subset of BPMN 2.0 elements are relatively to comprehend and learn, it is much more difﬁcult to gain effective modeling skills that are necessary to create good quality BPMN process

Learn PAd FP7-619583 39 BPMN 2.0 Element Description Activity A generic term for work that company performs in a process. An activity can be atomic or non-atomic (compound). Task A generic term for work that company performs in a process. An activity can be atomic or non-atomic (compound). Manual Task A task that is expected to be performed without the aid of any business process execution engine or any application. User task A typical workflow Task where a human performer performs the Task with the assistance of a software application and is scheduled through a task list manager of some sort. Service Task A task that uses some sort of service, which could be a Web service or an automated application. SubProcess A compound activity that is included within a process. It can be broken down into a finer level of detail through a set of sub-activities. Ad hoc SubProcess A process that contains a number of embedded inner activities and undefined or incomplete sequence flows, which allows some flexibility in activities ordering. Call Activity A point in the process where a reusable global process or a global task is invoked. Looping Activity An activity that is repeated for a number of objects. It could be standard (single performer) or multiple instance (several performers). Event Something that happens during the course of a process and affects the flow of the model. Events have a cause (trigger) or an impact (result). There are three types of Events, based on when they affect the flow: Start, Intermediate, and End. The most widely used event triggers are Message and Timer. Sequence Flow Relationship defining the sequential order in that activities will be performed in a business process. Data Object Provide information about what activities require to be performed and/or what they produce. Association Relationship that links activities and other BPMN elements with data objects or text comments. Gateway Relationship that links activities and other BPMN elements with data objects or text comments. Partecipant Represents a specific partner entity (e.g., a company) and/or a more general partner role (e.g., a buyer, seller, or manufacturer) that are involved in a collaboration. Pool Graphical representation of a participant in a Collaboration Performer The resource that will perform or will be responsible for an Activity. The performer can be specified in the form of a specific individual, a group, an organization role or position, or an organization. Lane A sub-partition within a process, sometimes within a pool. Lanes are used to organize and categorize Activities. Message The contents of a communication between two Participants. Message Flow Relationship indicating the flow of message between two participants that are prepared to send and receive them.

Table 4.1: Essential elements of BPMN 2.0

Learn PAd FP7-619583 40 models that are valuable for design, analysis, communication, and learning. It still takes a long journey to increase the maturity of business process modeling practice. In practice, most business process designers and analysts do a lot of mistakes that make their BPMN models overly complex, difficult to understand and maintain. Therefore, it is important to understand the common mistakes in creating BPMN process models, which we refer to as anti-patterns, and how to get rid of them by applying best practices. Darius Silingas et al. [48] provides valuable insights into refactoring BPMN models to increase their quality based on practical consulting experience in Public Administration, financial, telecommunication, software engineering and manufacturing domains. Learn PAd considers the quality of BPMN models as a critical success factor for a collaborative learning based on business process models. Thus the ability to guide the modelers by automatically detecting anti-patterns and suggesting how to fix them with the best practices is considered an important part of Learn PAd approach and platform. We will discuss a few major business process quality concerns by reviewing anti-patterns and corresponding best practices that will be considered in Learn PAd. The first fundamental thing that needs to be reviewed is BPMN element names. It is quite typical that modelers use noun-based names for activities, while a common best practice is to form activity names using verb + noun format. Another common mistake is to name gateways with decision making work statement (gateways do not perform work in BPMN!), while a common best practice is to keep gateways unnamed. In worst cases, modelers use different naming styles for BPMN elements of the same type in various diagrams. For an experienced business process modeler, solving naming conventions may seem to be trivial. However, in practice we face inconsistent naming issues in almost every organization that adopts BPMN as a standard for specifying business processes. Thus for Public Administration organizations that are adopting BPMN as a standard, it is highly recommended to establish naming guidelines and perform regular review of BPMN models to ensure that these guidelines are followed. Learn PAd will attempt to provide generic guidelines for BPMN naming conventions and will explore possibilities to automatically detect inconsistent naming cases. Figures 4.7 and 4.8 present an example of a business process diagram with inconsistent naming and a refactored version of this diagram, which applies consistent naming and uses BPMN elements properly.

Figure 4.7: An example of a business process diagram with inconsistent naming, which indicates misuse of BPMN 2.0 elements

The second anti-pattern is complex process diagrams. While BPMN supports modeling processes in multiple levels of detail, many practitioners are used to everything in one page style, which impairs overview and makes it difﬁcult to understand and analyze the process. Psychologists have determined that the best number of visual elements to focus on in one diagram is 7±2 [29]. In practice this rule is

Learn PAd FP7-619583 41 Figure 4.8: An example of refactored business process diagram with a consistent naming and proper use of BPMN 2.0 elements rarely followed - we have seen extreme cases of business process diagrams with up to 450 (!) tasks. Such large diagrams make it very difficult to analyze them and spot the issues the value of visualization is lost. The key best practice, which enables getting rid of complex diagrams and keeping all the important information about business process, is using several layers of detail. In this way, a very large (and typically inconsistent!) business process diagram can be decomposed into a consistent process model structured in several levels of detail and multiple diagrams. For example, a business process with three levels of detail following the rule of up to 10 activities in one level may maximum contain 1000 tasks. Learn PAd will attempt to provide guidelines regarding appropriate complexity of business process diagrams and automatically detect cases when these guidelines are not followed. The third common anti-pattern is inappropriate choice of the abstraction level for the process model, which not only makes it complex but also shifts the focus of the process diagram to details that are either irrelevant from the perspective of the reader or is much better handled using different means. A classic example is trying to model decision logic with gateways representing specific business rules, which makes a process model very fragile - the business rules typically change much faster that the process flow - and requires its frequent updates. Thus a recommended best practice is to separate process flow model from the rules and decision making model that could be handled using different languages such as Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules [36] and Decision Model and Notation [39]. Learn PAd will attempt to provide guidelines on choosing appropriate abstraction level when modeling business process in Public Administration domain and recommendations how to combine process model with rules, decisions, organization structure and other aspects that are important for learning how to perform the business process in practice. Figures 4.10 and 4.11 provide example of a process diagram, which elaborates decision-making based on rule-based gateways and its refactored version where decision making is represented by a single business rules task

Learn PAd FP7-619583 42 Figure 4.9: An example of decomposing a complex business process diagram into several levels of detail

Learn PAd FP7-619583 43 Figure 4.11: An appropriate business process model abstraction level, which gets rid of multiple gateways and represents only a task for making a decision

There will be additional anti-patterns and corresponding best practices that will be discovered and considered in Learn PAd project. The overall philosophy of Learn PAd is to provide guidelines on best practices for creating quality models and provided automate assessment of BPMN model quality, detect anti-patterns, and suggest refactoring leading towards process model quality improvements.

4.2.4. Extending BPMN and Integrating with Other Models and Resources

While BPMN is a great standard for modeling the flow of activities in a business process, it is a language that is limited to this aspect only, and it is not able to handle other aspects that are important when performing business processes in Public Administration domain. However, the BPMN is an extendible language, which makes it possible to add custom properties to its elements such as logs of changes with provided reasoning, date of last audit, associate key performance indicators and the current performance values, distribution/sharing confidentiality level, etc. OMG recently standardized UML Profile for Business Process Modeling [40], which enables integrating BPMN models capturing process flows with UML models capturing data object properties and relationships in UML-based modeling environments like MagicDraw. Additionally, the modeling tools can provide custom ways to integrate BPMN models with models based on different meta-models such as Unified Modeling Language [32], Business Motivation Model [37], Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules [36], and Decision Model and Notation [38]. Learn PAd will attempt to identify the most typical cases how BPMN needs to extended to capture the information properties that are important for specifying PA business properties and learning how to perform the process in practice. It will also explore custom ways to integrate business process models with information, rules, and motivation models to provide the complete context for performing business process (see the simplified examples in Sect.3). Since Learn PAd also envisions simulating business processes for learning purposes, this will also require some integration of business process models with simulation configuration models such as BPSim [57].

4.3. Modelling Case-based Processes

Business processes in Public Administrations are typically well-structured. However, there are processes for which execution can vary depending on the speciﬁc situation and the skills of the worker. This is particularly true for processes which require human judgement.

• In the process of family reunion (Sect. 2.3.1), the opinions from police and prefecture may cause acceptance or rejection. The effort to form the opinion can vary depending on the experience

Learn PAd FP7-619583 44 and skills of the person involved. Often the forming of an opinion requires intensive research and investigation. There are several sources that can be accessed. Sometimes even a personal inspection might be necessary. On the other hand, such a deep investigation might sometimes not be necessary if a similar case has occurred recently.

• In the process for granting citizenship (Sect. 2.3.2) several authorities have to give their opinion based on which the Ministery of the Interior makes an decision. In particular the check of the police-headquarters if there is any impediment is dependent on the speciﬁc case, e.g.the history of the applicant.

• The situation is similar for bouncer registration, where Police headquarters and several police departments such as Police anti-crime, General Investigation division and Special Operation give their opinions.

These examples show that the execution of processes might be determined by human judgment, the concrete situations, and external events. Because execution of case-based processes depends on human judgment, the knowledge of human worker is decisive. Therefore case-based processes are of specific relevance for learning. Management of case-based processes is called Adaptive Case Management (ACM). In case management, the flow of work cannot be expressed in detail by a diagramms like BPMN. This is why the Object Management Group (OMG) recently published CMMN, the Case Management Model and Nota- tion. CMMN has not been used in Public Administration, because of its novelty. We nevertheless have a deeper look at CMMN, because this leads to concepts which are important to model case-based processes. CMMN has specific modeling elements which allow to model unstructured work. OMG decided to keep CMMN and BPMN separate. Important difference between CMMN and BPMN is that CMMN supports planning of tasks at run-time. According to [34], a case has two distinct phases, the design-time phase and the run-time phase. The case model is created during the design-time phase. It includes tasks which are always part of pre-defined segments in the case model. In addition to tasks there are Discretionary Tasks which are available to the case worker, to be applied in addition, to his/her discretion. The discretionary tasks are specific for CMMN and not available in BPMN. In the run-time phase, case workers execute the plan, particularly by performing tasks as planned. Case workers can decide at run-time to execute discretionary tasks. Figure 4.14 describes these concepts.

Figure 4.12: Design-time phase modeling and run-time phase planning [34]

A Case consists of a Case Plan Model, a Case File Model, and a set of case Roles. The complete behavior model of a Case is captured in a Case Plan Model. There are four types of Plan Items (Figure 4.13):

Learn PAd FP7-619583 45 • tasks: units of work

• plan fragments / stages: container of Plan Items (somehow comparable to suprocesses)

• event listners: something that happens during the course of a case; correspond to catching events in BPMN

• milestones: achievable target, deﬁned to enable evaluation of progress of the Case.

Figure 4.13: Plan Items in CMMN [34]

A task in CMMN is a unit of work as in BPMN. There are three types of tasks in CMMN:

• Human Tasks: performed by a case worker; can be

• Blocking: the task is waiting until the work associated with the task is completed • Non-Blocking: the task is not waiting for the work to complete but completes immediately upon instantiation

• Process Tasks: can be used to call a Business Process

• Case Tasks: can be used to call another Case

Tasks are depicted by rectangle shape with rounded corners (cf. activities/tasks in BPMN). All kinds of tasks can be discretionary. A discretionary task is depicted with dashed lines.

Figure 4.14: Tasks in CMMN [34]

Figure 4.15 shows a Case Plan Model with all types of Plan Items. In addition to the Plan Items Fig. 4.15 shows two kinds of elements: Sentries and Planning Tables. These two elements allow to model the control flow and planning of cases. The diamonds which are placed on the border of Plan Items are called Sentries. Sentries define the criteria according to which the Plan Items are enabled (or entered) and terminated (or exited). A Sentry watches out for important situations to occur which influence the further proceedings of a Case. A Sentry is a combination of an event and/or a condition. An On-Part specifies the event that serves as trigger. The If-Part specifies a condition, as expression that evaluates over the Case File. When the event is received, the condition might be applied to evaluate whether the event has effect or not. If all On-Parts of a Sentry have occurred, and its If-Part (if existent) evaluates to true, the Sentry is satisfied. A Sentry that is satisfied triggers the Plan Item that refers to it. Planning tables are an equivalent to Sentries but for discretionary tasks. With planning tables it is possible to make Discretionary Items dynamically applicable for planning. Applicability Rules are used to specify, whether a Discretionary tasks is applicable (eligible, available) for planning. If the condition

Learn PAd FP7-619583 46 Figure 4.15: Example of a Case Plan Model in CMMN [34]

of an Applicability Rule evaluates to true, then the TableItem is applicable for planning. During planning only Discretionary Items, for which the Applicability Rule evaluates to true, must be shown to the Case Worker All information, or references to information, that is required as context for managing a Case, is deﬁned by a Case File. A Case File consists of Case File Items. A Case File Item is depicted by a Document shape.

4.4. Modelling Business Logic

Many public processes are oriented to make decisions, typically for granting different permissions, licenses and rights (for example building permission, business licenses, driving licenses, etc.). The processes described in Sect. 2.1 are typical for these class of processes. They include decision about family reunion, granting citizienship or registraion of bouncer. It is important to underline that the activities of Public Administrations are strictly guided by rules that emphasize the recognition of the legality and regularity of the administrative work. A business process of a Public Administration must comply with all regulations governing the subject of the service. This is particularly true for decisions. It has to be ensured that decision are made in line with the regulations and that decision are consistent in order to avoid arbitrariness. In Public Administrations, however, explicit knowledge relevant for a speciﬁc task or decision is normally spread over many different kinds of documents, forms, or legislative texts. Decision making is an important aspect for learning in order to make sure that all workers are aware of current decision rules and to allow for adaptation and improvement of decision making. This can be achieved by making the decision rules explicit and accessible to all relevant parties. The Decision Model from von Halle and Goldberg [56] and the recently published Decision Model and Notation DMN [38] are rigorous and technology-independent models of business logic that are simple to create, interpret, modify, and automate. They include important concepts that need to be taken into account for learning of business logic in public processes.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 47 4.4.1. The Decision Model and Notation (DMN)

The purpose of DMN is to provide the constructs that are needed to model decisions, so that organizational decision-making can be readily depicted in diagrams, accurately deﬁned by business analysts, and (optionally) automated [38]. Figure 4.16 shows how a decision model can be related to a business process. In this ﬁgure the decision logic is represented in DMN.

Figure 4.16: Aspects of process and decision modeling [38]

Figure 4.17 shows the DMN constructs. The Decision Requirements model represents decision, business knowledge models and knowledge sources. The business knowledge can be represented as a decision table which is a formal representation of decision logic. Each row in the decision table corresponds to a single decision rule. The decision logic can alternatively be represented in the script language FELL.

4.4.2. The Decision Model

The Decision Model was developed by Barbara von Halle and Larry Goldberg [56]. It is a template for perceiving, organizing, and managing the business logic behind a business decision. A Decision Model

Learn PAd FP7-619583 48 Figure 4.17: Aspects of process and decision modeling [38]

has two different kinds of diagrams: The Decision Model Diagram and the Rule Family Table. The Decision Model Diagram represents the entire business decision by giving an overview of the rule family tables and how they interact (Fig. 4.18). A Rule Family Table corresponds to a Decision Table. Each row of a Rule Family Table represents a single rule (Figure 4.19).

4.5. Enterprise Architecture

Basically, there are two different notions of enterprise architecture. One perception is as a high level abstraction (of reality) with the purpose of reducing complexity and increasing stakeholder’s understanding and communication (amongst others by [3,5, 60]). According to [5] the most dominant problem, stated in scientiﬁc as well as in popular science on enterprise management, is complexity and how it can be managed. The other, more recent notion of enterprise architecture focuses on integration for example by [59, 18, 55]. The ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 standard provides a conceptual model of Architecture Description. The

Learn PAd FP7-619583 49 Figure 4.18: Decision Model diagram [56]

Figure 4.19: Rule Family table in the context of a Decision Model diagram[56]

Learn PAd FP7-619583 50 standard emphasizes that a system-of-interest (which could be an enterprise, a system of systems, a product line, a service, a subsystem, or software) has an architecture even if that architecture is not written down ([6]). Hence, work on enterprise architecture clearly distinguishes between enterprise architecture and enterprise architecture descriptions. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 standard provides a conceptual model of the terms and concepts belonging to Architecture Description, partially depicted in Fig. 4.20.

Figure 4.20: Conceptual Model for EAD (excerpt from ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 provided by DSCI 2012)

The various model types introduced in the previous sections can be considered as parts of an enterprise architecture description. They do not exist for itself but are part of a whole. An enterprise architecture provides the structure for classifying the model types and show their relations. Zachman [60] for example provides a matrix of perspectives and aspects (cf. Sect. 4.5.1) but gives no advice on how the structure should be filled, i.e. how the enterprise architecture description should look alike. Hence, intersections of perspectives and aspects can be represented in models of various model types, like a data model or a process model. Those model types can in turn be represented in various languages. As shown above OMG has developed various specialized modeling languages. Figure 6.1 gives an example of how Zachmanns Enterprise Architecture Framework could be implemented. In the center is the process model depicted, represented in an enhanced BPMN as described above). In the same row, left and right to the process model, its context is shown: the document model and the organizational model. Looking at the other models depicted in the same column shows different representations of the same process, starting from an overview in the most upper row down to implementation as web-services and user-interface. What model types are needed is defined by the viewpoint that is taken. Viewpoints define abstractions on the set of models representing the enterprise architecture, each aimed at a particular type of stakeholder and addressing a particular set of concerns [54]. One viewpoint in Learn PAd is the learner the sets of models addressing learning where introduced in Sect. 3.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 51 Figure 4.21: Excerpt of an Enterprise Architecture based on Zachmanns EAF Matrix ([50])

Deﬁning an enterprise architecture and creating an architecture description is not a trivial task. Hence, over time many frameworks were developed for help. According to the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 standard An architecture framework establishes a common practice for creating, interpreting, analyzing and using architecture descriptions within a particular domain of application or stakeholder community ([6]). A ”Framework is a logical structure for classifying and organizing complex information” ([12]). There is a huge variety of [12] and [26] points out, to date more than 50 frameworks are available. In his compendium he gives a detailed description of 34 EAF, based on clearly structured and well deﬁned criteria. For Learn PAd two frameworks are of particular interest:

– the Zachmann Framework, because it is according to [26] widespread with approximate market share amounts between 22% and 25% and builds the basis for many other frameworks and

– the Open Group Architecture Framework TOGAF (The Open Group, 2011) due to its strong federal roots.

4.5.1. Zachmann Framework

The framework has been developed by John A. Zachmann and described ﬁrst in 1987. Today an extended version, co-authored with Johan F. Sowa, is available ([50]). Although all relevant information is subscribable and freely available on Zachmanns web-site the most famous publication is the EAF matrix as depicted in Fig. 4.22.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 52 Figure 4.22: Zachmann’s EAF Matrix

The framework provides different views and representations of an enterprise and a classiﬁcation scheme for organising the several aspects and perspectives of the enterprise. As shown in Fig. 4.22 these views are arranged into a two dimensional matrix. Rows depict different perspectives of the role a stakeholder may take (named planner, owner, designer, builder and subcontractor), and columns represent the various aspects that should be considered. They are different abstractions from or different ways to describe the real world ([50]). The aspects (columns) are named based on the fundamentals of communication. The interrogatives What (data), How (function), When (time), Who (people), Where (network), and Why (motivation) build the basis for the concise description of complex ideas ([60]). Intersections of perspectives and aspects can be represented in models of various model types, like a data model or a process model. Those model types can in turn be represented in various languages. A process for example can be modeled in the BPMN (OMG, 2011) or with a mark-up language for Event Driven Process Chains ([28]).

4.5.2. TOGAF

TOGAF was ﬁrst published in 1995, based on the US Department of Defense Technical Architecture Framework for Information Management (TAFIM). From this foundation, The Open Group Architecture Forum has developed successive versions of TOGAF; the latest is V 9.1 (The Open Group, 2011). TOGAF is widespread in Public Administrations ([25]). In Switzerland for example TOGAF is binding standard for the deﬁnition of the target architecture that builds the basis for the development of information infrastructure of Public Administrations ([19]). The current version of TOGAF consists of the following main components:

Learn PAd FP7-619583 53 – An Architecture Capability Framework addressing the organisation, processes, skills, roles and responsibilities. .

– The Architecture Development Method (ADM). This part is the core of TOGAF; it gives a step- by-step approach for developing an enterprise architecture. ADM consists of eight phases. In phase A, the objectives and responsible persons are identiﬁed. In phases B to D, the desired state of the business-, information systems- and technology- architecture are speciﬁed. Phase E describes needed transformations to achieve a desired state. Phase E develops the detailed implementation and migration plan which is monitored in phase G. Finally a change management process in phase H collects requirements and ascendancies serving as foundation for the next cycle ([53]).

Figure 4.23: TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) ([53]).

– The Architecture Content Framework considers an overall enterprise architecture composed of four interrelated architectures: Business Architecture, Data Architecture, Application Architecture and Technology (IT) Architecture. The individual architectures are described in detail and relations among them are deﬁned.

– The Enterprise Continuum and Tools is a model for structuring a virtual repository and comprises of various reference models to show the development from a foundational to an enterprise speciﬁc architecture.

The TOGAF framework can be combined with ArchiMate modeling language, both standards provides by the OMG. According to ([13]) ArchiMate is fully complementary to the content as speciﬁed in the TOGAF standard. The ArchiMate standard can be used to describe all aspects of the EA in a coherent way, while tailoring the content for a speciﬁc audience.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 54 Figure 4.24: The TOGAF framework and the ArchiMate modeling language ([13])

4.5.3. ArchiMate

ArchiMate as a standard modelling language for describing enterprise architecture and is complemented by some considerations regarding language extension mechanisms, analysis, and method- ological support ([53]). Since 2008 ArchiMate has served as an open standard by the Open Group and in 2009 ArchiMate (1.0) became a technical standard ([53]). In 2012 ArchiMate 2.0 ([54]) an upwards-compatible evolution from ArchiMate 1.0 was published, which added new features and integrated usage feedback. The ArchiMate language aims to support enterprise architects in describing, analyzing and visualizing the relationships among business domains in an unambiguous way. It is thought of as complementary to TOGAF in the way that the structure of the ArchiMate language neatly corresponds with the three main architectures as addressed in the TOGAF ADM, namely Business Architecture, Information Systems Architecture and Technology Architecture (cf. Figure 4.24). ArchiMate provides a graphical representation of its language elements based on UML class diagram but customized and limited to a small set of modelling constructs in the interest of simplicity of learning and use. That notation is widely accepted and thus supported by several tools, amongst others by the Enterprise Architect 1 and Agilian 2.

Figure 4.25: ArchiMate Structure

Figure 4.25 depicts the general structure of ArchiMate represented in a cube. ArchiMate consist of three aspects (passive, behaviour, active). 3 and three perspectives (business, application and technology, called layers); in addition two views (external and internal) are considered ([54]) Starting from five core concepts for each aspect on a not explicitly specified Top Layer, concepts on each lower layer are specialized together with their relations. Like the concepts, relations are kept generic: composition, ag- gregation, association, and specialization (taken from UML 2.0) plus access, assignment, composition, flow, triggering and used by ([54]).

1Enterprise Architecture is UML team-based modeling environment with visual tools for business modeling, systems engineering and enterprise architecture. URL: http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/ 2Agilian is a modeling environment supporting business process modeling, enterprise architecture and software development. URL: http://www.visual-paradigm.com 3These three aspects active structure, behavior, and passive structure have been inspired by natural language, where a

Learn PAd FP7-619583 55 Since the ArchiMate core language contains only the basic concepts and relationships that serve general enterprise architecture modelling purposes, the language is designed to allow for extensions and specialisations ([54]). The possibility of extending and refining ArchiMate is particularly important because of the heterogeneity of models present in an enterprise, with varying degrees of maturity and the difficulty to determine their interrelations and the need to do so ([24]). Based on ArchiMate is the Enter- prise Ontology ArchiMEO ([17]). With their approach Hinkelmann et al. aim to close the research gap between Enterprise Architecture Description and Enterprise Ontologies by modelling ArchiMate as an ontology in a formal representation language (RDF(S) / OWL) and providing necessary enhancements (and adaptions) for its use on operational level. Learn PAd will draw upon these results. Figure 4.26 depicts the extended conceptual model ArchiMEO based on the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010. [51] describe the top down approach for determine enterprise architecture in Public Administrations (PA). Main focus is on specifying processes (the HOW aspect of the Zachmann framework) suggesting decomposing the services, PAs are obliged to provide, into business processes. Since PAs services are determined by law the suggested approach is well feasible. The Swiss association, defining standards for e-Government in Switzerland shares this notion in their standard for describing and documenting tasks, services, processes, and access structures of the Public Administration in Switzerland as depicted in Fig. 4.27, drawing upon the work of [58]. The goal of Enterprise Architecture (description) is to provide a holistic view on enterprise knowledge on different aspects supporting different views of the various stakeholders. According to [51,1] Enterprise Architecture is generally defined as the set of descriptive representations (i.e. models) that are relevant for describing an Enterprise such that it can be produced to managements requirements (quality) and maintained over the period of its useful life (change). Hence, a requirement is to represent the models in human adequate way, e.g. by graphical representation but at the same time having a sentence has a subject (active structure), a verb (behavior), and an object (passive structure). ([52])

Figure 4.26: Extended Conceptual Model ArchiMEO (based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 provided by DSCI 2012)

Learn PAd FP7-619583 56 Figure 4.27: Basic Terms and Relations of Swiss e-Government Architecture (based on [9]) representation that is machine processable ([18] et al.). Both requirements will be addressed in Learn PAd.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 57 Learn PAd FP7-619583 58 5 Discussion

In this section, we summarize the results obtained by analyzing a) three business processes in the domain of the Italian Public Administration; and b) a number of relevant modeling notations. In particular, we started with an in-depth analysis of the three business process models described in Sect. 2.3, i.e., the family reunion, the grant citizenship, and finally the bouncer registration. Such an investigation has been of paramount relevance since permitted the identification of a number of concepts which are recurrent in the specification of such kind of processes and have therefore been collected together to form an initial formulation of a catalog. The considered concepts are typically used for describing organizational behavior. In order to support in an integrated manner the modelling of those activities in the business process that are associated with the creation and application of knowledge, we proceeded then by analyzing in Sect.3 a number of relevant notations, i.e.,

• the Business Motivation Model (BMM), • the Organization Model (OM), • the Competency Model (CM), and • the Document Model (DM).

These models complement the description of the organizational behavior given by the business process models. In addition, cross-linking correspondences between modeling concepts are provided with consequent overall consistency constraints. Moreover, since this kind of processes typically present knowledge intensive (sub-)processes, the Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) has been considered as well. The most important concepts identified in these models have been again identified, described, and in turn added to the previously collected concepts. An important stage of the analysis consisted in discussing how business processes are typically used in the Public Administration in Sect.2. To this end, the BPMN modeling language has been taken into account. BPMN is a broad notation defined to provide a process modelling notation that could be easily understood by all business stakeholders. However, when using this notation within the Public Administration, some limitations may occur as discussed in Sect. 4.2.2. In addition, the typical anti-patterns and best practices in modeling business processes have been also considered. This last part of the analysis somehow complemented and refined the work done in Sect. 2.3 on the considered processes. While identifying the concepts we also characterized them by means of high-level concerns in order to cluster concepts devoted to homogenous purposes. For instance, decision task is a concept which typically occurs in knowledge-related management, therefore we assigned it to the knowledge concern; in certain cases a concept might belong to more than one concern, as decision logic which is in both the knowledge and learning concern. Belonging to multiple concerns is nothing else that a correspondence between the same concept across several aspects or viewpoints. The concerns which have been taken into consideration are described as follows

business motivation any aspect related to the qualitative or quantitative description of what has to be achieved and how the achievements can be measured to assess the performance.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 59 case anything permitting the description of discretionary information and the enactment of discretionary activities including conditions denoting their admissibility and wellformed- ness. information anything denoting documents and data or reference to them consumed or produced during the enactment of a process activity. knowledge this concern is fundamentally related to most of the aspects of Learn PAd which considers learning and working strongly intertwined (“learning while doing“) due to the beneﬁcial impact of the organizational learning over the organizational behavior. This can happen in several way, but basically the knowledge acquired while doing can then be used for training civil servant before serving real requests. learning any aspects which enables and facilitates the learning process in Public Adminis- trations, engaging workers in a holistic learning, collaborative and assessment experience. organization anything related to knowledge, skills, and attitudes expected by business actors in order to achieve a business goal. process anything related to the description of structured or unstructured collection of related activities or tasks that are carried out to accomplish the intended objectives of an organization; the concepts proper to this concern are related at different extent to the description of the activities necessary to the description of such procedure.

Such concerns are partly related to requirement dimensions given in the Learn PAd D1.1 deliverable, where similar viewpoints are given. However, the scope of such dimensions is somewhat different as the various aspects are given with an orthogonal perspective by considering the learning, technical, and meta-modeling platforms. Finally, we are able to formulate the complete catalog of concepts, with their description, and associated concerns. Interestingly, a number of concepts seem to be peculiar to speciﬁc concerns, but others seem to be more ubiquitous or with a broader scope, which suggests that while certain concepts can be instantiated in different concerns (e.g., tasks in case and process), others represents the trait-d’union between different notations (e.g., roles in process and organization), which consequently requires the formulation of constraints or well-formedness rules when they will be formalized in some modeling notations, like a meta-model. The complete catalog is given in a tabular form in alphabetical order to ease its consultation and comprehension as follows

Concept Description Concerns (Business) Actor A business actor is deﬁned as an organizational en- process, tity that is capable of performing behavior. A business organization actor may be assigned to one or more business roles (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 15); A business actor can be a legal entity, an organization unit or a person (Enterprise) Architecture Architecture Description is an artifact that expresses organization, Description an Architecture. Architects and other system stake- process, holders use Architecture Descriptions to understand, case analyze and compare Architectures, and often as blueprints for planning and construction (source: DSCI, 2012)

Learn PAd FP7-619583 60 (LET) Institution Any institution delivering learning, education or training organization, (LET) services, whether they be formal or non-formal learning (source: ISO/IEC, 2011, p. 3); in Learn PAd Institution is considered any Legal Entity or Organization Unit that it is of importance of any kind for learning. For example: the Organisation Unit that is Process Owner. Activity A generic term for work that company performs in process, a process. An activity can be atomic or non-atomic case (compound). Ad hoc SubProcess A process that contains a number of embedded inner process, activities and undefined or incomplete sequence flows, case which allows some flexibility in activities ordering. Applicability Rules Applicability Rules are used to specify, whether a case, Discretionary tasks is applicable. Only Discretionary process Items, for which the Applicability Rule evaluates to true, must be shown to the Case Worker. They are part of CMMN. But independent of the modeling language, the rules are relevant because they guide the human worker and avoid the application of irrelevant tasks. Aspect The aspects (columns in the Zachmann framework) organization are named based on the fundamentals of communication. The interrogatives What (data), How (function), When (time), Who (people), Where (network), and Why (motivation) build the basis for the concise description of complex ideas (source: Zachman, 2008) Assessment Assessment expresses a logical connection (i.e., fact business type) between Influencers and the Ends and/ or Means motivation, of the business plans. In this way, an Assessment in- learning dicates which Influencers are relevant to which Ends and/or Means (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 46) Assessment Process Assessment Process describes how the assessment learning of learning is done, e.g. by simulation, tests, process performance (source: ISO/IEC, 2011) Association Relationship that links activities and other BPMN ele- process ments with data objects or text comments. Business Logic Knowledge used in processes for executing tasks. knowledge Learning business knowledge mainly increases the ef- fectivity of business processes by improving the results of a process. Business Policies In general, Business Policies exist to govern; that is, organization, control, guide, and shape the Strategies and Tactics. business They define what can be done and what must not be motivation done, and may indicate how, or set limits on how, it should be done (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 13) Business Process A set of related business activities that produce out- process, come of value to a customer case

Learn PAd FP7-619583 61 Business Rules Business Rules provide the leverage needed for build- business ing effective, adaptable business solutions and sys- motivation, tems (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 9). Business process, Rules are derived from Business Policies case Choreography A definition of the expected behavior, basically a process procedural contract, between interacting participants. While a normal private process exists within a pool, a choreography exists between pools (or participants) and does not have a single controlling body. Collaborative Business Represents multiple interacting public processes that process, Process collaborate to achieve a specific goal. case Competency A statement that describes the required knowledge, organization, skills, and behaviors of a person to successfully per- learning form a task. An observable or measurable ability of an actor to perform a necessary action(s) in a given context(s) to achieve a specific outcome(s) (source: ISO/IEC, 2011, p. 3) Course of Action A Course of Action defines what has to be done, not business how well it has to be done. Measures of performance motivation are defined in Objectives that are supported by the Courses of Action (source: OMG, 2010, p. 13) Criteria and method To describe how Competencies are evaluated as well learning as how Competencies are acquired the concepts Eval- uation, Assessment Process and Criteria and method are used (source: ISO/IEC, 2011, p. 37) Data Object Provide information about what activities require to be process performed and/or what they produce. Decision The execution of processes might be determined by process, human judgment, concrete situations, and external case, events. learning Decision Logic A special kind of Business Logic consisting of rules for knowledge, making decisions. Management, adaptation and reuse learning of decision rules are important for learning knowledge of processes Decision Table A representation of Decision Logic. In the Decision knowledge Model the Decision Table are calles Rule Family Table. Decision Task A decision task is a knowledge-intensive task in which knowledge some decision is made. Decision tasks are based on decision logic. Directives Directives keep the enterprise on course and moving process, toward its Desired Results. Because of their integral business role in guiding Courses of Action, Directives are in- motivation cluded in the set of Means concepts (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 9) Discretionary Document Discretionary Documents are available to the case case, worker; they can be accessed his/her discretion. Dis- process, cretionary documents are not part of CMMN, but they learning were identified during this analysis.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 62 Discretionary Task Discretionary Tasks are available to the case worker; case, they can be applied to his/her discretion. The name process comes from CMMN. In Public Administration they typically occur in decision processes. The execution of these tasks depends on human judgment. Therefore they are relevant for learning. End Ends are about what an enterprise wants to be. In the business Business Motivation Model, Ends are categorized as motivation Vision and Desired Results, and Desired Results as Goals and Objectives (source: OMG, 2010, p. 12) Enterprise Architecture Enterprise architecture (EA) is a discipline for proac- organization, tively and holistically leading enterprise responses process, to disruptive forces by identifying and analyzing the case execution of change toward desired business vision and outcomes (source: http://www.gartner.com/it- glossary/enterprise-architecture-ea/) Enterprise Architecture Enterprise Architecture Description Language is the organization Description Language language in which an Enterprise Architecture is described Enterprise Architecture An architecture framework establishes a common organization Framework practice for creating, interpreting, analyzing and using architecture descriptions within a particular domain of application or stakeholder community (source: DSCI, 2012). Enterprise Ontology A formal representation of an Enterprise Architecture organization Description that is machine executable and also cog- nitively adequate for humans Environment Environment determines location, duration, date and organization time, equipment etc. shapes of a (learning) action (source: ISO/IEC, 2011) Event Something that happens during the course of a pro- process cess and affects the flow of the model. Events have a cause (trigger) or an impact (result). There are three types of Events, based on when they affect the flow: Start, Intermediate, and End. The most widely used event triggers are Message and Timer. Gateway Controls the divergence and convergence of sequence process flows in a process. It will determine branching, forking, merging, and joining of paths. Internal markers will indicate the type of behavior control. Goal A Goal tends to be longer term, and defined qualita- business tively rather than quantitatively. It should be narrow - motivation focused enough that Objectives can be defined for it (source: OMG, 2010, p. 12)

Learn PAd FP7-619583 63 Individual off-line Learning the notion of this type of learning is of a ’try run’, e.g. a learning new employee may learn how a process is executed in general navigating and exploring models and content, i.e. process and business logic performing a simulation of a business process Individual on-line Learning ”the notion of this type of learning is of learning by do- learning ing, e.g. a civil servant performs her daily work guided by the process model provided in the Learn PAd platform (i.e. the wiki)” Influencer Influencer (external and internal) affects the organiza- business tion’s ability to employ its Means or achieve its Ends motivation (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 46) Input (document & data) It is possible to reference documents or data from a process, document or data model, which are used as input for learning, the realization of a process activity information Knowledge object knowledge objects represent the explicit knowledge ei- knowledge ther required in a specific business process or describing it for further reference. Knowledge objects facilitate and leverage knowledge creation and sharing activities by providing humans with the information they need. They facilitate the knowledge transfer from person to person or from information to person and are used to search, organize and disseminate knowledge content. Knowledge objects serve as input for tasks and KM tasks in the business process model and they are produced as output of KM tasks. They enable the cogni- tive interoperability between the organizational behavior and the organizational learning (cfr. Fig. 2.1). Knowledge source In Public Administrations, explicit knowledge relevant knowledge for a specific task or decision is normally spread over many different kinds of documents, forms, or legislative texts. Knowledge sources can also be people with specific expertise, skills or experiences. Lane A sub-partition within a process, sometimes within a process pool. Lanes are used to organize and categorize Ac- tivities. Learner’s Profile A learners profile expresses competency data associ- learning, ated to a learner (source: European Committee For organization Standardization 2005) Means Means are about what an enterprise has decided to do business in order to become what it wants to be (source: OMG, motivation 2010, p. 13) Message The contents of a communication between two Partic- process, ipants. information Message Flow Relationship indicating the flow of message between process, two participants that are prepared to send and receive information them.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 64 Objective An Objective is a step along the way towards a Goal. business It must have an end date, and criteria to determine motivation, whether it has been reached or not. Objectives pro- process, vide the basis for measuring whether progress is being learning made towards Goals. Organization Unit Although BMM does not elaborate organizational organization, structures (it is outside the scope of the model) their process, importance is recognized. Organization Unit is a sub- case concept of Business Actor. Organizational Learning ”the notion of this type of learning is of benefiting learning, from contribution of others like sharing experiences organization, with non-routine cases between individuals or trans- business lating individual experiences into recommendations for motivation model improvements (process and business models)” Outcome Outcome is the observable and measurable result learning of (learning) actions; the Outcome concept could be divided into sub-concepts like Knowledge Acquired, Skills Obtained, and Attitude about the use of those skills (source: ISO/IEC, 2011, p. 8) Output (document & data) It is possible to reference documents or data from a process, document or data model, which are used as output for learning, the realization of a process activity information Participant Represents a specific partner entity (e.g., a company) process, and/or a more general partner role (e.g., a buyer, organization, seller, or manufacturer) that are involved in a collab- case oration. Performance Indicator (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a quantitative or process, qualitative measurement, or any other criterion, by learning which the performance, efficiency, achievement, etc of a person or organization can be assessed, often by comparison with an agreed standard or target. A performance indicator is related to criteria determining objectives. Performer The resource that will perform or will be responsible for process, an Activity. The performer can be specified in the form organization, of a specific individual, a group, an organization role or case position, or an organization. Person Person describes real employee-users of the tool. If organization, the business process model is enacted, persons are learning, playing the roles that have been modelled. Person is a process, sub-concept of Business Actor. case Perspective A role, i.e. a stakeholder (named planner, owner, de- organization signer, builder and subcontractor) may take on different perspective (rows in the Zachmann Framework) on an Enterprise Architecture Pool Graphical representation of a participant in a Collabo- process ration.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 65 Private Business Process A business process that is internal to a specific organi- process, zation. Synonyms: workflow, orchestration of services. case Process Logic Knowledge about a process, in particular the process process, flow and the resources assigned to a process. Learn- knowledge ing of process logic typically increases the efficiency of a process. Public Business Process Represents the interactions between a private busi- process, ness process and another process or participant. Only case those activities that are used to communicate to the other participant(s), plus the order of these activities, are included in the public process. All other internal activities of the private business process are not shown in the public process view. Role tasks and KM tasks are assigned to roles during the process, modelling of the business process. They describethe organization, entity that is responsible for the realisation of the task. case There are different responsibilities, e.g. responsible for execution, accountable for profing results, collaboration etc. Sentry Sentries are the counterpart of gateways in CMMN. case They define the criteria according to which the Plan Items are enabled and terminated. A Sentry is a combination of an event and/or a condition. An On-Part specifies the event that serves as trigger. The If-Part specifies a condition. Sentries are used in CMMN instead of gateways. Learning rules of Sentries allows to improve the execution of cases. Sequence Flow Relationship defining the sequential order in that activ- process ities will be performed in a business process. SubProcess A compound activity that is included within a process. process, It can be broken down into a finer level of detail through case a set of sub-activities. Task An atomic activity within a process flow. A task is used process, when the work in the process cannot be broken down case to a finer level of detail. Generally, an end-user and/or applications are used to perform the task when it is executed. View A view is defined as a part of an architecture descrip- organization tion that addresses a set of related concerns and is addressed to a set of stakeholders. A view is specified by means of a viewpoint, which prescribes the concepts, models, analysis techniques, and visualizations that are provided by the view. Simply put, a view is what you see and a viewpoint is where you are looking from (source: The Open Group 2012, p. 74)

Learn PAd FP7-619583 66 Viewpoint Viewpoints are a means to focus on particular aspects organization of the architecture. These aspects are determined by the concerns of a stakeholder with whom communication takes place (source: The Open Group 2012, p. 74) Vision In the Business Motivation Model, Ends are catego- business rized as Vision and Desired Results, and Desired Re- motivation sults as Goals and Objectives (source: Open Group, 2012, p. 12) Table 5.1: Identiﬁed modeling constructs

Learn PAd FP7-619583 67 Learn PAd FP7-619583 68 6 Conclusions

In this document, we presented ﬁrst results of WP3 related to the analysis of the domain of business processes in the Public Administration in order to identify the objects and relationships that are needed to be modeled for the related knowledge and learning management. In Sect.2, we introduced three processes in the Public Administration from which we gained insight into the domain. The outcome from this domain analysis has been twofold:

a) we identiﬁed elements and artifacts that are to be represented (cf. Table 5.1 in Sect. 5) and

b) we showed the complexity of PA processes and experienced the limitation of existing models to represent such complexity, that is: representing process and business logic in tables, UML ﬂow- chart diagrams and BPMN 2.0 models.

In Sect. 3 we drew upon these findings and analysed the knowledge needed to perform business processes and hence, learning in PAs on a general basis. We used a consistent but simplified example to identify the process related meta models, like Case Management Model, Business Motivation Model, Organization Model and Document Model and focussed if ever possible on existing standards (e.g. provided by OMG or ISO). Since in Learn PAd learning is always considered in the context of improving business (process) results we also showed how the process related models are intertwined with learning, respectively provide input for learning. In Sect. 4 we analysed several modelling languages and practices. We broadened the view on business process modelling having a look on Enterprise Architecture. As depicted in Fig. 4.21 an Enterprise Architecture provides a logical setting for classifying and organizing the various models that will be used in Learn PAd. We briefly introduced two frameworks supporting the creation of Enterprise Architecture descriptions: Zachmann and TOGAF. The first because of its widespread use the second because of its strong federal roots. We also checked on ArchiMATE, a standard modelling language for describing enterprise architecture and gave an outlook on the possibility of an ontological representation of an EA, drawing upon the enterprise ontology ArchiMEO. In the second part of Sect. 4, we elaborated on the main meta-models for process modelling: BPMN 2.0 and CMMN. Finally, in Sect. 5 we discussed concerns we identified and those concepts, expressing these concerns. We will elaborate on this in our further work. Among the main outcomes from Task 3.1 of WP3, a catalogue of categorized concepts used by Public Administrations to manage both the business and associated learning processes has been derived. The catalogue is presented according to different dimensions, called concerns. This permitted a clear distinction among the modeling conceptual entities according to the different stakeholders’ perspectives. In addition, it has been possible to clarify the correspondences among the different concerns due to concepts belonging to more than one view. Such a result will be used in the forthcoming activities to develop a collection of EMF/Ecore1 meta- models that will provide the possibility to express the previously identified elements. The development process of such meta-models will be iterative and will comprise modeling activities needed to assess the expressiveness of the developed meta-models. In addition, unforeseen requirements will be also

1http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/

Learn PAd FP7-619583 69 identiﬁed in order to augment and reﬁne the modeling notation to better accommodate and support learning-related aspects.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 70 Bibliography

[1] J. Bezivin´ and O. Gerbe.´ Towards a Precise Deﬁnition of the OMG/MDA Framework. In Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001), pages 273–282, Los Alamitos CA, 2001. IEEE Computer Soci- ety.

[2] Jean Bezivin.´ On the uniﬁcation power of models. Software & Systems Modeling, 4(2):171–188, 2005.

[3] David Chen, Guy Doumeingts, and Francois Vernadat. Architectures for enterprise integration and interoperability : Past , present and future. Computers in Industry, 59:647–659, 2008.

[4] European Commission. European Interoperability Framework (EIF) Towards Interoperability for European Public Services, 2011.

[5] Jan L. G. Dietz and Jan A. P. Hoogervorst. Enterprise ontology in enterprise engineering. In SAC ’08 Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Applied computing, 2008.

[6] DSCI. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 Website, 2012.

[7] eCH. Geschftsprozesse graﬁsch darstellen (BPMN). Technical report, eCH E-Government Stan- dards, 2011.

[8] European Committee For Standardization. A European Model for Learner Competencies. 2005.

[9] Fachgruppe Geschaftsprozesse.¨ eCH-0138 Rahmenkonzept zur Beschreibung und Dokumenta- tion von Aufgaben, Leistungen , Prozessen und Zugangsstrukturen der offentlichen¨ Verwaltung der Schweiz, 2012.

[10] Damiano Falcioni. Modeling and Veriﬁcation of Business Processes for the Public Administration. PhD thesis, School of Science and Technology, Universita` degli Studi di Camerino.

[11] Damiano Falcioni, Andrea Polini, Alberto Polzonetti, and Barbara Re. Improving PA Business Processes through Modeling, Analysis, and Reengineering. In Electronic Government, pages 78– 89. Springer, 2012.

[12] FEAF. Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework, 1999.

[13] Henry Franken, Sven van Dijk, and Bas van Gils. Three Best Practices for Success- ful Implementation of Enterprise Architecture Using the TOGAF Framework and the ArchiMate Modeling Language, 2013. http://blog.opengroup.org/2013/02/08/ three-best-practices-for-successful-implementation-of-enterprise-\ architecture-using-the-togaf-framework-and-the-archimate-modeling-language/, retrieved 9.7.2014.

[14] Jakob Freund and Bernd Rucker.¨ Real-Life BPMN: Using BPMN 2.0 to Analyze, Improve, and Automate Processes in Your Company. Createspace Independent, 2012.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 71 [15] P. Heisig. Process modelling for knowledge management. In 12th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, 2000. Juan-les-Pins, French Riviera.

[16] D. Hernandez-Leo,´ J.I. Asensio-Perez,´ Y. Dimitriadis, M.L. Bote-lorenzo, I.M. Jorr´ın-Abellan,´ and E.D. Villasclaras-Fernandez.´ Reusing IMS-LD Formalized Best Practices in Collaborative Learning Structuring. Advanced Technology for Learning, 2(3):223–232, 2005.

[17] Knut Hinkelmann, Andreas Martin, Simon Nikles, and Barbara Thonssen.¨ ArchiMEO: Represent- ing and Enhancing ArchiMate in RDFS 3.0. Submitted to Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architecture, 2013.

[18] Knut Hinkelmann, Emanuela Merelli, and Barbara Thonssen.¨ The Role of Content and Context in Enterprise Repositories. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Advanced Enter- prise Architecture and Repositories - AER 2010, 2010.

[19] Informatikstrategieorgan Bund ISB. Leitfaden E-Government, 2009.

[20] ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC TR 24763 Information technology Learning, education and training Conceptual Reference Model forCompetency Information and Related Objects. Technical report, ISO/IEC, 2011.

[21] Jan Johanson and Jan-Erik Vahlne. The internationalization process of the ﬁrm - a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of international business studies, pages 23–32, 1977.

[22] David H. Jonassen. Constructivist learning environments on the web: engaging students in mean- ingful learning. In The Educational Technology Conference and Exhibition, 1999.

[23] Ivan Kurtev, Jean Bezivin,´ and Mehmet Aks¸it. Technological spaces: An initial appraisal. 2002.

[24] Marc Lankhorst. ArchiMate Language Primer. Technical report, 2004.

[25] Katja Liimatainen, Martin Hoffman, and Heikkila¨ Jukka. Overview of Enterprise Architecture work in 15 countries. Finnish Enterprise Architecture Research Project. Technical report, Ministry of Finance, Helsinki, 2007.

[26] Dirk Matthes. Enterprise Architecture Frameworks Kompendium. Springer, Heidelberg, 2011.

[27] S. J. Mellor, A. N. Clark, and T. Futagami. Guest Editors’ Introduction: Model-Driven Development. IEEE Software, 20(5):14–18, 2003.

[28] Jan Mendling and Markus Nuttgens.¨ Event-driven-process-chain-markup-language (EPML): An- forderungen zur Deﬁnition eines XML-Schemas fur¨ Ereignisgesteuerte Prozessketten (EPK). In Proceedings of the 1st GI-workshop on business process management with event-driven process chains (EPK 2002), pages 87–93, Trier, Germany, 2002.

[29] George A. Miller. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review 63.2, 1956.

[30] Object Management Group (OMG). MDA Guide version 1.0.1, 2003. OMG Document: omg/2003- 06-01.

[31] OMG. Business Motivation Model, 2010.

[32] OMG. Uniﬁed Modeling Language (UML). Technical report, Object Management Group OMG, 2011.

[33] OMG. Uniﬁed Modeling Language (UML) v.2.4.1, 2011.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 72 [34] OMG. Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN), V 1.0. Technical report, Object Manage- ment Group OMG, December 2013.

[35] OMG. OMG Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Speciﬁcation v2.4.1, 2013.

[36] OMG. Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR). Technical report, Object Management Group OMG, 2013.

[37] OMG. Business Motivation Model (BMM). Technical report, Object Management Group OMG, 2014.

[38] OMG. Decision Model and Notation 1.0 Beta. Technical Report January, Object Management Group OMG, 2014.

[39] OMG. Decision Model and Notation (DMN). Technical report, Object Management Group OMG, 2014.

[40] OMG. UML Proﬁle for BPMN Processes. Technical report, Object Management Group OMG, 2014.

[41] OMG. XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) v.2.4.2, 2014.

[42] Business Process Model OMG. Notation (BPMN) 2.0. Object Management Group: Needham, MA, 2494:34, 2011.

[43] Weidong Pan and Igor Hawryszkiewycz. A method of deﬁning learning processes. In Beyond the 21st ASCILITE Conference, pages 734–742, 2004.

[44] Barbara Petrini. Modelling and Analysis of Public Administration Processes. Master’s thesis, Uni- versita` degli Studi di Camerino, Italy, 2010.

[45] Douglas C. Schmidt. Guest Editor’s Introduction: Model-Driven Engineering. Computer, 39(2):25– 31, 2006.

[46] Ed Seidewitz. What Models Mean. IEEE Software, 20(5):26–32, September/October 2003.

[47] B. Selic. The Pragmatics of Model-driven Development. IEEE Software, 20(5):19–25, 2003.

[48] Darius Silingas and Edita Mileviciene. Refactoring BPMN Models: From Bad Smells to Best Prac- tices and. BPMN 2.0 Handbook Second Edition: Methods, Concepts, Case Studies and Standards in Business Process Management Notation, page 125, 2011.

[49] Bruce Silver. BPMN Method And Style, With BPMN Implementer’s Guide: A Structured Approach For Business Process Modeling And Implementation Using BPMN 2.0. 2011.

[50] J F Sowa and John A. Zachman. Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 31(3):590 – 616, 1992.

[51] K Tarabanis and V Peristeras. Towards an Enterprise Architecture for Public Administrations: A Top Down Approach, 2000.

[52] The Open Group. ArchiMate 1.0 Speciﬁcation. Technical Report 5, The Open Group, 2009.

[53] The Open Group. TOGAF 9 V91., 2011.

[54] The Open Group. ArchiMate 2.0 Speciﬁcation, 2012. http://pubs.opengroup.org/ architecture/archimate2-doc/.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 73 [55] Katariina Valtonen, Sirpa Mantynen,¨ Mauri Leppanen,¨ and Mirja Pulkkinen. Enterprise Architecture Descriptions for Enhancing Local Government Transformation and Coherency Management. 2011 IEEE 15th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops, pages 360–369, 2011.

[56] Barbara von Halle and Larry Goldberg. The Decision Model: A Business Logic Framework Linking Business and Technology. CRC Press Auerbach Publications, 2010.

[57] WfMC. BPSim: Business Process Simulation Speciﬁcation. Technical report, 2012.

[58] M. Wimmer and R. Traunmuller.¨ One-Stop Government Portale: Erfahrungen aus dem EU-Projekt eGOV. One-Stop Government Portale: Erfahrungen aus dem EU-Projekt eGOV, 2005.

[59] R. Woitsch, D. Karagiannis, D. Plexousakis, and K. Hinkelmann. Business and IT alignment: the IT-Socket. Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik, 126(7):308–321, 2009.

[60] John A. Zachman. The Zachman Framework For Enterprise Architecture. A Primer For Enterprise Engineering And Manufacturing, 2012.

Learn PAd FP7-619583 74