DOCSLIB.ORG

A New Paradigm Integrating Business Process Modeling and Use Case Modeling

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A New Paradigm Integrating Business Process Modeling and Use Case Modeling University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2015 A New Paradigm Integrating Business Process Modeling and Use Case Modeling Barclay Brown University of Central Florida Part of the Industrial Engineering Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Doctoral Dissertation (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Brown, Barclay, "A New Paradigm Integrating Business Process Modeling and Use Case Modeling" (2015). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 57. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/57 A NEW PARADIGM INTEGRATING BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING AND USE CASE MODELING by BARCLAY R. BROWN B.S. Virginia Tech, 1981 M.A. State University of West Georgia, 1993 M.B.A Kennesaw State University, 1996 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Spring Term 2015 Major Professor: Waldemar Karwowski © 2015 Barclay R. Brown ii ABSTRACT The goal of this research is to develop a new paradigm integrating the practices of business process modeling and use case modeling. These two modeling approaches describe the behavior of organizations and systems, and their interactions, but rest on different paradigms and serve different needs. The base of knowledge and information required for each approach is largely common, however, so an integrated approach has advantages in efficiency, consistency and completeness of the overall behavioral model. Both modeling methods are familiar and widely used. Business process modeling is often employed as a precursor to the development of a system to be used in a business organization. Business process modeling teams and stakeholders may spend months or years developing detailed business process models, expecting that these models will provide a useful base of information for system designers. Unfortunately, as the business process model is analyzed by the system designers, it is found that information needed to specify the functionality of the system does not exist in the business process model. System designers may then employ use case modeling to specify the needed system functionality, again spending significant time with stakeholders to gather the needed input. Stakeholders find this two-pass process redundant and wasteful of time and money since the input they provide to both modeling teams is largely identical, with each team capturing only the aspects relevant to their form of modeling. Developing a new paradigm and modeling approach that achieves the objectives of both business process modeling and use case modeling in an integrated form, in one analysis pass, results in time savings, increased accuracy and improved communication among all participants in the systems development process. iii Analysis of several case studies will show that inefficiency, wasted time and overuse of stakeholder resource time results from the separate application of business process modeling and use case modeling. A review of existing literature on the subject shows that while the problem of modeling both business process and use case information in a coordinated fashion has been recognized before, there are few if any approaches that have been proposed to reconcile and integrate the two methods. Based on both literature review and good modeling practices, a list of goals for the new paradigm and modeling approach forms the basis for the paradigm to be created. A grounded theory study is then conducted to analyze existing modeling approaches for both business processes and use cases and to provide an underlying theory on which to base the new paradigm. The two main innovations developed for the new paradigm are the usage process and the timebox. Usage processes allow system usages (use cases) to be identified as the business process model is developed, and the two to be shown in a combined process flow. Timeboxes allow processes to be positioned in time-relation to each other without the need to combine processes into higher level processes using causal relations that may not exist. The combination of usage processes and timeboxes allows any level of complex behavior to be modeled in one pass, without the redundancy and waste of separate business process and use case modeling work. Several pilot projects are conducted to test the new modeling paradigm in differing modeling situations with participants and subject matter experts asked to compare the traditional models with the new paradigm formulations. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Waldemar Karwowski, chair of my dissertation committee for his encouragement and wise counsel in the direction of my research and its relevance, and the committee members Dr. Thomas O’Neal, Dr. Gene Lee and Dr. William Thompson for their support and feedback based on years of experience in industry and academia. I would like to thank my colleagues at IBM including Gavin Arthurs, Dr. Graham Bleakley, Dr. Bruce Douglass, Dave Brown and Tim Bohn for their patience and interest in discussing the subject and offering valuable input, and Rick Steiner, formerly of Raytheon for his expert input regarding these concepts. My colleagues at the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) also provided valuable feedback as this work progressed and allowed a forum for discussion along the way. v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................ x LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................ xiv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................................. xv CHAPTER 1: THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The Need for an Integrated Modeling Approach ...................................................................... 1 1.2 Current Practice Approaches .................................................................................................... 5 1.2.1 Business Process Modeling Only .......................................................................................... 8 1.2.2 Use Case Modeling Only ....................................................................................................... 9 1.2.3 Business Process Modeling followed by Use Case Modeling ............................................. 10 1.2.4 Hybrid approach considering business processes to be groupings of use cases ............... 10 1.2.5 Hybrid approach using use cases to model business processes (business use cases) ....... 11 1.3 Approach to the Integration of Modeling Approaches ................................................................. 13 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Observations from the Field .................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Business and Mission .............................................................................................................. 16 2.3 Generalizing the problem of modeling behavior .................................................................... 17 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................... 20 3.1 Review Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 20 3.2 Technology in Business Process Models ....................................................................................... 21 3.3 Concepts Employed in Process Modeling ..................................................................................... 23 3.4 Use Cases and Business Processes ................................................................................................ 25 vi 3.5 Limitations of Business Process Modeling .................................................................................... 29 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................ 34 4.1 Advantages of the new Paradigm ................................................................................................. 35 4.2 Additional Benefits of the New Paradigm ..................................................................................... 36 CHAPTER 5: METHODS AND PROCEDURES ................................................................................................. 38 5.1 Phase 1: Case Study: Exploration of case studies of business process and use case modeling.......................................................................................................................................... 38 5.2 Phase 2: Grounded Theory Study: Development
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Filling the Gap Between Business Process Modeling and Behavior Driven Development
    Filling the Gap between Business Process Modeling and Behavior Driven Development Rogerio Atem de Carvalho Rodrigo Soares Manhães Fernando Luis de Carvalho e Silva Nucleo de Pesquisa em Sistemas de Informação (NSI), Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF), Brazil {ratem, rmanhaes, [email protected]} 1. Introduction Behavior Driven Development (NORTH, 2006) is a specification technique that is growing in acceptance in the Agile methods communities. BDD allows to securely verify that all functional requirements were treated properly by source code, by connecting the textual description of these requirements to tests. On the other side, the Enterprise Information Systems (EIS) researchers and practitioners defends the use of Business Process Modeling (BPM) to, before defining any part of the system, perform the modeling of the system's underlying business process. Therefore, it can be stated that, in the case of EIS, functional requirements are obtained by identifying Use Cases from the business process models. The aim of this paper is, in a narrower perspective, to propose the use of Finite State Machines (FSM) to model business process and then connect them to the BDD machinery, thus driving better quality for EIS. In a broader perspective, this article aims to provoke a discussion on the mapping of the various BPM notations, since there isn't a real standard for business process modeling (Moller et al., 2007), to BDD. Firstly a historical perspective of the evolution of previous proposals from which this one emerged will be presented, and then the reasons to change from Model Driven Development (MDD) to BDD will be presented also in a historical perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language
    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
    [Show full text]
  • Process Mapping
    December 2011 Contents Process Mapping 1. Introduction 1. Introduction 2. What is Process Mapping? 3. Why Process Map? Process map, also known as process flowchart, is used to describe a process. A process is defined as “a 4. Limitations of Process structured set of activities that transform inputs into Mapping outputs”. Processes should be measurable with clear performance indicators, and assist in defining 5. Types of Process Maps responsibilities, internal controls and work standards for 5.1. Relationship Map 5.2. Process Flowchart compliance, consistency and performance. Processes 5.3. Cross-Functional Process are strategic assets of an organisation that if well Map managed, will deliver a competitive advantage. 6. Key Steps in Process Mapping 7. Process Mapping “Dos and Don’ts” 2. What is Process Mapping? Case study A process map is a graphical representation and defines . Hughes Space and how an organisation performs work: the steps involved Communications Company and their sequence; who is responsible for each step; and . Construction Project Integrations (CPI) Pte Ltd how work groups interact. Process mapping refers to “activities involved in defining exactly what a business Recommended Readings entity does, who is responsible, to what standard a process should be completed and how the success of a References business process can be determined”. It visually describes the flow of activities of a process – the Upcoming Programmes sequence and interactions of related process steps, activities or tasks that make up an individual process, from beginning to end. A process map is usually read from left to right or from top to bottom. Arrows that go from right to left or bottom to top, also known as backflow, Please note: This Productivity Link is provided as are usually minimised as it can greatly confuse the part of our Productivity Information reader.
    [Show full text]
  • Matters of (Meta-) Modeling
    Appeared in the Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, Volume 5, Number 4, pp. 369-385, December 2006 Matters of (Meta-) Modeling Thomas Kuh¨ ne Darmstadt University of Technology, Darmstadt, Germany e-mail: [email protected] Abstract With the recent trend to model driven engineering ontologies for the basic terms of their discipline, any com- a common understanding of basic notions such as “model” munication may create the illusion of agreement where there and “metamodel” becomes a pivotal issue. Even though these is none, i.e., unnoticed misunderstandings, and raise barriers notions have been in widespread use for quite a while, there of communication where they are just accidental. is still little consensus about when exactly it is appropriate In the following we will focus on the term “model” in the to use them. The aim of this article is to start establishing a context of model driven engineering. Our models are thus all consensus about generally acceptable terminology. Its main language-based in nature, unlike, e.g., physical scale models contributions are the distinction between two fundamental- and they describe something as opposed to models in mathe- ly different kinds of model roles, i.e. “token model” versus matics which are understood as interpretations of a theory [3]. “type model”1, a formal notion of “metaness”, and the consi- In an attempt to define the scope of the notion “model” we deration of “generalization” as yet another basic relationship should consider how it has been traditionally used in softwa- between models. In particular, the recognition of the funda- re engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Systems Modeling Languages
    Fundamentals of Systems Engineering Prof. Olivier L. de Weck, Mark Chodas, Narek Shougarian Session 3 System Modeling Languages 1 Reminder: A1 is due today ! 2 3 Overview Why Systems Modeling Languages? Ontology, Semantics and Syntax OPM – Object Process Methodology SySML – Systems Modeling Language Modelica What does it mean for Systems Engineering of today and tomorrow (MBSE)? 4 Exercise: Describe the “Mr. Sticky” System Work with a partner (5 min) Use your webex notepad/white board I will call on you randomly We will compare across student teams © source unknown. All rights reserved. This content is excluded from our Creative Commons license. For more information, see http://ocw.mit.edu/help/faq-fair-use/. 5 Why Systems Modeling Languages? Means for describing artifacts are traditionally as follows: Natural Language (English, French etc….) Graphical (Sketches and Drawings) These then typically get aggregated in “documents” Examples: Requirements Document, Drawing Package Technical Data Package (TDP) should contain all info needed to build and operate system Advantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Familiarity to creator of description Not-confining, promotes creativity Disadvantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Room for ambiguous interpretations and errors Difficult to update if there are changes Handoffs between SE lifecycle phases are discontinuous Uneven level of abstraction Large volume of information that exceeds human cognitive bandwidth Etc…. 6 System Modeling Languages Past efforts
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Reinforcement Learning to Routing and Virtualization in Computer Networks
    Applications of Reinforcement Learning to Routing and Virtualization in Computer Networks by Soroush Haeri B. Eng., Multimedia University, Malaysia, 2010 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Engineering Science Faculty of Applied Science © Soroush Haeri 2016 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Spring 2016 All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced without authorization under the conditions for “Fair Dealing.” Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law, particularly if cited appropriately. Abstract Computer networks and reinforcement learning algorithms have substantially advanced over the past decade. The Internet is a complex collection of inter-connected networks with a numerous of inter-operable technologies and protocols. Current trend to decouple the network intelligence from the network devices enabled by Software-Defined Networking (SDN) provides a centralized implementation of network intelligence. This offers great computational power and memory to network logic processing units where the network intelligence is implemented. Hence, reinforcement learning algorithms viable options for addressing a variety of computer networking challenges. In this dissertation, we propose two applications of reinforcement learning algorithms in computer networks. We first investigate the applications of reinforcement learning for deflection routing in buffer- less networks. Deflection routing is employed to ameliorate packet loss caused by contention in buffer-less architectures such as optical burst-switched (OBS) networks. We present a framework that introduces intelligence to deflection routing (iDef).
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Model-Based Systems Engineering and Virtual Engineering Tools for Detailed Design
    Scholars' Mine Masters Theses Student Theses and Dissertations Spring 2011 Integration of model-based systems engineering and virtual engineering tools for detailed design Akshay Kande Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses Part of the Systems Engineering Commons Department: Recommended Citation Kande, Akshay, "Integration of model-based systems engineering and virtual engineering tools for detailed design" (2011). Masters Theses. 5155. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses/5155 This thesis is brought to you by Scholars' Mine, a service of the Missouri S&T Library and Learning Resources. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INTEGRATION OF MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND VIRTUAL ENGINEERING TOOLS FOR DETAILED DESIGN by AKSHA Y KANDE A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the MISSOURI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE IN SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 2011 Approved by Steve Corns, Advisor Cihan Dagli Scott Grasman © 2011 Akshay Kande All Rights Reserved 111 ABSTRACT Design and development of a system can be viewed as a process of transferring and transforming data using a set of tools that form the system's development environment. Conversion of the systems engineering data into useful information is one of the prime objectives of the tools used in the process. With complex systems, the objective is further augmented with a need to represent the information in an accessible and comprehensible manner.
    [Show full text]
  • System-Of-Systems Approach for Integrated Energy Systems
    A System-of-Systems Approach for Integrated Energy Systems Modeling and Simulation Preprint Saurabh Mittal, Mark Ruth, Annabelle Pratt, Monte Lunacek, Dheepak Krishnamurthy, and Wesley Jones National Renewable Energy Laboratory Presented at the Society for Modeling & Simulation International Summer Simulation Multi-Conference Chicago, Illinois July 26–29, 2015 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Conference Paper NREL/CP-2C00-64045 August 2015 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC (Alliance), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Accordingly, the US Government and Alliance retain a nonexclusive royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of this contribution, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Complexity Evaluation with Business Process Modeling and Simulation
    Complexity Evaluation with Business Process Modeling and Simulation Krishan Chand and Muthu Ramachandran School of Computing, Creative Technologies and Engineering, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, U.K. Keywords: Business Process Modeling, BPMN, Simulation, Complexity. Abstract: To stay in the competition and to make a stand in the market, companies have to make the quick changes. Business Process Modelling (BPM) has made an impact in the respect to capture the process and to make the changes accordingly for improvement in business operations. Modeling and simulation is the process of making a process simple to reduce complexity. However, modellers or researchers still making the complex models. Modeling and simulation are the areas which need to be addressed, despite only a few researchers worked in the respective areas of modelling and simulation. The paper addresses the complexity issue of cloud performance criteria of time and cost. To this end, this paper has evaluated the domain of financial services in the cloud with Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) and simulation. Two different scenarios have been created to demonstrate the result of performance complexity of cloud services. Finally, the conclusion has been derived to help and guide further research. 1 INTRODUCTION of a process directed to make it with fewer efforts, accordingly to ease the complexity of the business Due to its existence importance not because of process and to make it simple and understanding. However, the main objective of the process modeller descriptive nature of the process, but also the is to make the process understanding and to reduce characteristics representation for the activities such as business process improvement, business process the complexity in the practical world, are designing the complex models (Henriksen, 2008; Chwif et al., re-engineering and process standardization, business 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Business Process Improvement Methodologies: Common Factors and Their Respective Efficacies
    BUSINESS PROCESS IMPROVEMENT METHODOLOGIES: COMMON FACTORS AND THEIR RESPECTIVE EFFICACIES Winston R. Nickerson A thesis submitted to The University of Gloucestershire in accordance with the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Business Administration in the Faculty of Business, Education & Professional Studies 10 November, 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My heartfelt thanks go to my supervisor, Professor Gerald Watts. His expertise provided both insight and motivation - the two key factors which moulded this thesis into the final form that it has taken. His understanding of both the academic and business worlds helped me move beyond my preferred paradigms and enabled me to produce a dissertation that is acceptable to the academic community and benefits the business world. I acknowledge that, at times, I tried his patience with my resolve and proclivity to focus predominantly on this research’s contributions to business practices. I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the business managers, consultants and practitioners who participated in the initial survey as well as the subsequent interview sets. The information they provided filled the enormous voids in evidence left by the available literature. This gap closure enabled me to analyse business process improvement methodologies in a unique manner and to an extent previously not available to the business community. i ABSTRACT Business process improvement (BPI) methodologies play an important role in increasing a business’s performance and its competitiveness. Since World War II, a number of these methodologies have been developed. Each of these held to a different philosophy as to what drives process improvement. Therefore, each focused on a seemingly unique aspect or parameter of business processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Collaboration Analytics Need More Comprehensive Models and Methods. an Opinion Paper Areum Han1, Florian Krieger2, Samuel Greiff3
    Volume 8(1), 13–29. http://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2021.7288 Collaboration Analytics Need More Comprehensive Models and Methods. An Opinion Paper Areum Han1, Florian Krieger2, Samuel Greiff3 Abstract As technology advances, learning analytics is expanding to include students’ collaboration settings. Despite their increasing application in practice, some types of analytics might not fully capture the comprehensive educational contexts in which students’ collaboration takes place (e.g., when data is collected and processed without predefined models, which forces users to make conclusions without sufficient contextual information). Furthermore, existing definitions and perspectives on collaboration analytics are incongruent. In light of these circumstances, this opinion paper takes a collaborative classroom setting as context and explores relevant comprehensive models for collaboration analytics. Specifically, this paper is based on Pei-Ling Tan and Koh’s ecological lens (2017, Situating learning analytics pedagogically: Towards an ecological lens. Learning: Research and Practice, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1305661), which illustrates the co-emergence of three interactions among students, teachers, and content interwoven with time. Moreover, this paper suggests several factors to consider in each interaction when executing collaboration analytics. Agendas and recommendations for future research are also presented. Notes for Practice • Studies of educational contexts using collaboration analytics are being implemented, but some analytics practices may unintentionally fail to fully capture the comprehensive context (e.g., when users without sufficient contextual information must make final decisions based on data collected without predefined learning models). Furthermore, definitions and perspectives on collaboration analytics vary across disciplines and underlying perspectives on collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing a Hybrid Business Process Mapping Model – a Comprehensive Framework Derived from the Idef0 and Flow Chart Methods
    Introducing a hybrid business process mapping model – A comprehensive framework derived from the idef0 and flow chart methods Yousef A AL-Turki, Ph.D [email protected] Abstract Business process mapping has been heralded as a key method for improving Business Process Management. Thereby enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of business operations. There are a number of critical success factors however that need to be in place in order to attain this. One of them is the method or technique to be used for the capture, documentation, modeling, communication and improvement of business processes. There exist a wide plethora of methods, each of them with a particular area of focus. This paper aims to select two of the common systems; Flow chart and IDEF0 and consider a hybrid model of process modeling that can avail complementary strengths and address gaps that exist within each of the approaches. The proposed model was tested against the scenario of manufacturing business process activities in order to assess and demonstrate its capabilities. A hybrid approach was developed and implemented against this scenario. It was found that the hybrid approach did manage to address gaps effectively. The new system offered greater precision, smoothness of activity flow and improved sequencing meanwhile retaining a level of simplicity that maintained the usability of the method. Nonetheless, the challenges that bear upon the success of process mapping continue to be relevant. process mapping focuses on the aspect of process change. Where insufficient attention is given to organizational change, process mapping projects will not reap the expected benefits. Keywords: Business process mapping, improving business process management, flow charts, IDEF0 Introduction Business processes may be considered as the heartbeat of the organization.
    [Show full text]