Multi-Perspective Modeling and Analysis of Cooperation Processes Von der Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen Hochschule Aachen zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades einer Doktorin der Naturwissenschaften genehmigte Dissertation vorgelegt von Diplom-Informatikerin Stefanie Kethers Magistra Artium aus Aachen Berichter: Universitätsprofessor Dr. Matthias Jarke Professor Eric Yu, Ph.D. Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 18. Dezember 2000 D 82 (Diss. RWTH Aachen) Abstract The success of an organization depends on its ability to cooperate internally and externally in its business processes. Cooperation processes, both within and between organizations, are thus of key importance to an organization. However, cross-functional cooperation in particular often suffers from problems such as communication gaps, conflicting goals and priorities, misunder- standings, and lack of long-term knowledge management. The capturing and evaluation of cooperation processes often focuses on an activity-oriented per- spective of the process, leading to a bird’s eye view of the intended process, while neglecting the real process and its problem areas. In this thesis, the CO-MAP methodology for modeling and analyzing real cooperation processes is introduced. CO-MAP focuses on the process stake- holders and the impact of the cooperation processes on their work. To do so, CO-MAP provides a method for capturing the process stakeholders’ perspectives of the cooperation process in an informal process diagram. These informal process diagrams are then mapped into four different formal models, representing the strategic, activity-oriented, service-oriented, and information flow-oriented perspective of the process, respectively. The integration of these four perspectives provides a holistic representation of the process. Furthermore, CO-MAP provides means for the analysis of the formal models with respect to quality criteria and integrity constraints for cooperation processes that are also presented in this thesis. CO-MAP has been validated in five industrial case studies at four different small and medium- sized enterprises. In addition, CO-MAP has been employed to capture the cooperation and communication structures in a large cultural sciences research project, to demonstrate CO- MAP’s transferability to different contexts. Kurzfassung In Zeiten zunehmender Produktkomplexität, durch Globalisierung ständig intensiveren Wettbe- werbs und steigender Kundenansprüche hängt der Erfolg eines Unternehmens maßgeblich von seinen Geschäftsprozessen ab. Diese erfordern die oft bereichsübergreifende Kooperation der Prozeßbeteiligten. Solche Kooperationsprozesse weisen jedoch oft Probleme wie z.B. Kom- munikationsengpässe, konfligierende Ziele und Prioritäten der Prozeßbeteiligten, Mißverständ- nisse oder mangelnden Wissensaufbau auf. Solche Probleme der Ist-Prozesse lassen sich mit traditionellen Methoden der Prozeßerfassung und -bewertung, die auf die Dokumentation von Soll-Prozessen ausgerichtet sind, nicht aufdecken oder lösen. In dieser Arbeit wird die Methode CO-MAP vorgestellt, deren Ziel die Erfassung und Bew- ertung realer Kooperationsprozesse ist. Dazu stellt CO-MAP eine Methode zur Erfassung in- formeller Prozeßmodelle aus der Sicht der Prozeßbeteiligten bereit. Diese informellen Modelle werden dann mittels CO-MAP in formale, in der Wissensrepräsentationssprache M-TELOS repräsentierte Modelle transformiert, die jeweils eine strategische, ablauforientierte, service- orientierte, sowie informationsfluß-orientierte Sicht auf den Prozeß repräsentieren. Die Integra- tion dieser verschiedenen Perspektiven ergibt eine holistische Darstellung des Prozesses. Weiterhin umfaßt CO-MAP eine Analysekomponente, mittels derer die formalen Prozeßmo- delle anhand von im Rahmen dieser Arbeit erarbeiteten Qualitätskriterien für Kooperationspro- zesse bewertet werden können. CO-MAP wurde im Rahmen von fünf Industriefallstudien in vier verschiedenen kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen eingesetzt und validiert. Zur Demonstration der Übertragbarkeit von CO-MAP auf andere Kontexte wurde die Methode zur Erfassung der Kooperations- und Kommunikationsstrukturen eines großen kulturwissenschaft- lichen Forschungsprojektes eingesetzt. Acknowledgements The research presented in this thesis was undertaken during my time as a research assistant and Ph.D. student at Informatik V, RWTH Aachen, Germany, and has partially been funded through the BMBF project “Regionale Kooperationskompetenz” and the DFG “Socionics” SPP project “Tropos”. I would like to thank those who have influenced and enabled this research: ¯ Matthias Jarke, my supervisor, for guidance, critical input, and incentive while giving me my freedom to realize my ideas in my own way. ¯ Eric Yu, my second advisor, for his interest in my work, his valuable remarks and sug- gestions. ¯ all my colleagues, especially Dr. Bettina von Buol and Mareike Schoop, Ph.D., for many discussions, valuable suggestions, and a friendly atmosphere. ¯ Thomas List and Christoph Quix, who patiently answered my questions about Concept- Base. ¯ my partners in the BMBF project “Regionale Kooperationskompetenz”, especially Dr. Stefanie Weimer, for the productive setting, which greatly helped this thesis. ¯ my partners in the DFG “Socionics” SPP project “Tropos”: Günter Gans, Prof. Gerhard Lakemeyer, Ph.D, Dr. Lutz Ellrich, Dr. Christiane Funken, and Martin Meister, for the fruitful discussions and cooperation. ¯ my friends, for their support and encouragement. ¯ Jörg, for the empathy, support, and motivation he provided. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1ProblemDescription............................... 1 1.2ThesisGoalandOverview............................ 2 1.3 Thesis Outline . ................................ 3 2 Cooperation and the Organization 5 2.1ObjectivesofthisChapter............................. 5 2.2InterorganizationalCooperation......................... 6 2.2.1 BasicConceptsandDefinitions..................... 6 2.2.2 Cooperation Taxonomies ......................... 8 2.2.3 PhaseModelsofInterorganizationalCooperation............ 10 2.2.4 SociologicalAspectsofCooperation................... 12 2.3 Cooperation in Practice: A Literature Review .................. 15 2.3.1 CooperationBenefits........................... 15 2.3.2 Disadvantages Resulting from Cooperation . .............. 16 2.3.3 Critical Issues in Interorganizational Cooperation . ....... 17 2.4 Cooperation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Empirical Results . 20 2.4.1 Characteristics of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises . ....... 20 2.4.2 CooperationandSmallandMedium-SizedEnterprises......... 21 2.4.3 EmpiricalResultsfromAdCo...................... 22 2.5CooperationattheGroupLevel.......................... 28 2.5.1 Computer-Supported Cooperative Work . .............. 29 2.5.2 The Language-Action Perspective . .................. 30 2.5.3 Groupware ................................ 31 2.6Conclusion.................................... 37 i CONTENTS 3 Cooperation Processes and Process Quality 39 3.1ObjectivesofthisChapter............................. 39 3.2BasicConceptsandDefinitions.......................... 40 3.2.1 Process.................................. 40 3.2.2 BusinessandCooperationProcess.................... 41 3.3 Business Process Quality . ......................... 43 3.3.1 Process Quality Criteria ......................... 43 3.3.2 BestPracticeProcesses.......................... 49 3.4Conclusion.................................... 51 4 Cooperation Process Modeling 53 4.1ObjectivesofthisChapter............................. 53 4.2BasicConceptsandDefinitions.......................... 53 4.2.1 Model,MetaModel,andMetaMetaModel............... 53 4.2.2 ProcessModelandProcessModeling.................. 55 4.2.3 OntheUsefulnessofBusinessProcessModels............. 56 4.3 Model Quality . ................................ 59 4.3.1 General Model Quality Issues . .................. 59 4.3.2 GuidelinesofModeling(GoM)..................... 60 4.3.3 Reference Models . ......................... 63 4.4PerspectivesofProcessModeling........................ 66 4.4.1 BasicConceptsandDefinitions..................... 66 4.4.2 PerspectivesforModelingCooperationProcesses............ 67 4.4.3 StrategicPerspective........................... 70 4.4.4 Activity-OrientedPerspective...................... 70 4.4.5 Service-Oriented Perspective . .................. 74 4.4.6 InformationFlow-OrientedPerspective................. 75 4.5Conclusion.................................... 76 5 Cooperation Process Formalisms 77 5.1ObjectivesofthisChapter............................. 77 5.2 An Example from AdCo ............................. 77 5.3Yu’sStrategicProcessModelingMethod..................... 78 5.3.1 BasicConceptsandDefinitions..................... 79 ii CONTENTS 5.3.2 TheStrategicDependencyModel.................... 80 5.3.3 TheStrategicRationaleModel...................... 87 5.3.4 Application and Evaluation of Yu’s Strategic Process Modeling Method 93 5.4TheEvent-DrivenProcessChain......................... 94 5.4.1 Introduction and Basic Concepts . .................. 94 5.4.2 ASampleProcessModel......................... 96 5.4.3 Syntax.................................. 96 5.4.4 Semantics................................. 101 5.4.5 Application and Evaluation of the Event-Driven Process Chain . 105 5.5 Service-Oriented Cooperation Process Modeling Method . ....... 106 5.5.1 BasicConceptsandDefinitions..................... 106 5.5.2 ASampleProcessModel........................