Business process modelling (BPM) is an important way to understand business processes and provides a basis for further improvement and integration. In this paper, five business process modelling languages are used to model a business scenario and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed. Some process characteristics are derived from real scenarios and used for evaluating current business process modelling languages. The evaluation results reveal that none of the business process modelling languages studied can fulfil the modelling requirements. The limitations of current business process modelling languages are further investigated and future research directions are discussed.
GiaglisG. M.Transformation of static process models into dynamic simulations: Issues and considerations. In Process modelling (Eds Scholz-ReiterB.StahlmannH.-D.NetheA.), 1999, pp. 161–176 (Springer, Berlin).
2.
GiaglisG. M.A taxonomy of business process modeling and information systems modeling techniques. Int. J. Flexible Mfg Systems, 2001, 13, 209–228.
EndlR.MeyerM.Potential of business process modelling with regard to available workflow management systems. In Process modelling (Eds. Scholz-ReiterB.StahlmannH.-D.NetheA.), 1999, pp. 100–116 (Springer, Berlin).
6.
PetersL.PetersJ.Using IDEF0 for dynamic process analysis. In Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and automation, 1997, pp. 3203–3208.
Aguilar-SavenR. S.Business process modelling: Review and framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 2004, 90(2), 129–149.
10.
van der AalstW.DumasM.ter HofstedeA.Web service composition languages: Old wine in new bottles? In Proceedings of the 29th EUROMICRO Conference on New waves in system architecture, (Ed. ChroustG.HoferC.) 2003, pp. 298–305 (IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos). Available: http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/documentation.htm.
11.
SoderstromE.AnderssonB.JohannessonP.PerjonsE.WanglerB.Towards a framework for comparing process modelling languages. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Advanced information systems engineering (CaiSE). LNCS, 2002, 2348, 600–611.
12.
GeorgakopoulosD.HornickM.ShethA.An overview of workflow management: From process modeling to workflow automation infrastructure. Distributed Parallel Databases, 1995, 3, 119–153.
13.
KBSI, integration definition for function modelling, Federal information processing standards publication 183, 1993. Available: http://www.idef.com/idef0.html
14.
MurataT.Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proc. IEEE, 1989, 77(4), 541–580.
15.
van der AalstW.van HeeK.Business process redesign: A Petri-net-based approach. Computers in Industry, 1996, 29, 15–26.
16.
MarsanM. A.BalboG.ConteG.DonatelliS.FranceschinisG.Modeling with generalised stochastic petri nets, 1995 (Wiley, Chichester, UK).
17.
JensenK.Coloured petri nets: Basic concepts, analysis methods and practical use, 2nd edition, Vol. 1, 1997 (Springer, Berlin).
LeymannF.AltenhuberW.Managing business processes as an information resource. IBM Systems J., 1994, 33(2), 326–348.
22.
von UthmannC.BeckerJ.Guidelines of modelling (GoM) for business process simulation. In Process modelling (Eds Scholz-ReiterB.StahlmannH.-D.NetheA.), 1999, pp. 100–116 (Springer, Berlin).
van der AalstW.Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Inf. Software Technol., 1999, 41(10), 639–650.
31.
KindlerE.On the semantics of EPCs: A framework for resolving the vicious circle. Technical report, Reihe Informatik, University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany, 2003. Available: http://www.upb.de/cs/kindler/Publikationen/
SchlenoffC.GruningerM.TissotF.ValoisJ.LubellJ.LeeJ.The Process Specification Language (PSL): Overview and Version 1.0 specification, 2000. Available: http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/
BarrosA. P.HofstedeA. H. M.Towards the construction of workflow suitable conceptual modelling techniques. Inf. Systems J., 1998, 8(4), 313–337.
40.
HommesB.van ReijswoudV.Assessing the quality of business process modelling techniques. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System sciences, Maui, Hawaii, 4–7 January 2000, pp. 1–10.
41.
SchlenoffC.KnutillaA.RayS.Unified process specification language: Requirements for modeling process, 1996. Available: http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl
42.
JinX.Deriving process characteristics from real scenarios. Internal report, Computer Science Department, The University of Manchester, 2002.
43.
van der AalstW. M. P.ter HofstedeA. H. M.YAWL: Yet Another Workflow Language. Information Systems, 2005, 30(4), 245–275.
44.
van der AalstW. M. P.Don't go with the flow: Web services composition standards exposed. Web services - been there done that?Trends Controversies, IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2004, 18(1), 72–76.
45.
OuldM.Business processes: Modelling and analysis for re-engineering and improvement, 2002 (Wiley, Chichester, UK). Business process modeling language 1.0 specification. Available: www.bpmi.org
46.
LindsayA.DownsD.LunnK.Business processes - attempts to find a definition. Inf. Software Technol., 2003, 45(15), 1015–1019.
47.
SmithH.FingarP.Business process management: The third wave, 2003 (Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, Florida).
48.
OdehM.KammR.Bridging the gap between business models and system models. Inf. Software Technol., 2003, 45(15), 1053–1060.
