Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Policy-enabled goal-oriented requirements engineering for semantic Business Process Management

2010; Wiley; Volume: 25; Issue: 8 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/int.20431

1098-111X

Ken Decreus, Geert Poels, Marwane El Kharbili, Elke Pulvermueller,

Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies

International Journal of Intelligent SystemsVolume 25, Issue 8 p. 784-812 Research Article Policy-enabled goal-oriented requirements engineering for semantic Business Process Management Ken Decreus, Corresponding Author Ken Decreus [email protected] Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Ken Decreus, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Marwane El Kharbili, ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorGeert Poels, Geert Poels [email protected] Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, BelgiumSearch for more papers by this authorMarwane El Kharbili, Corresponding Author Marwane El Kharbili [email protected] ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, Germany Ken Decreus, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Marwane El Kharbili, ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorElke Pulvermueller, Elke Pulvermueller [email protected] Institute of Computer Science, University of Osnabrueck, Albrechtstr. 28, 49076, GermanySearch for more papers by this author Ken Decreus, Corresponding Author Ken Decreus [email protected] Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Ken Decreus, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Marwane El Kharbili, ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorGeert Poels, Geert Poels [email protected] Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, BelgiumSearch for more papers by this authorMarwane El Kharbili, Corresponding Author Marwane El Kharbili [email protected] ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, Germany Ken Decreus, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium Marwane El Kharbili, ARIS Research, IDS Scheer AG, Altenkesselerstrasse 17, 66115 Saarbrücken, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorElke Pulvermueller, Elke Pulvermueller [email protected] Institute of Computer Science, University of Osnabrueck, Albrechtstr. 28, 49076, GermanySearch for more papers by this author First published: 18 June 2010 https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20431Citations: 9Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Business Process Management is a paradigm for enterprise computing that uses IT not only to support or execute business processes but also to continuously monitor and improve these processes to better achieve business objectives. A variant on Business Process Management, called Semantic Business Process Management, is meant to further close the gap between business and IT by attaching business semantics to the technology artifacts used for Business Process Management. A current problem in Semantic Business Process Management is that the specification of the business requirements that processes must respond to and that follow from the enterprise's strategic decisions, is not fully integrated within the design of the processes themselves. In this paper, we propose an approach in which business requirements for business processes are formally modeled and the skeleton of the designs of these business processes is automatically generated from these models. The approach presented here focuses upon the modeling of policies (i.e., a kind of business requirements for business processes) and on the subsequent design of business processes that comply to these policies. A first contribution is extending an existing goal-oriented requirements specification language, i.e. Formal Tropos, to incorporate policies, called Policy-extended Formal Tropos. A second contribution is offering an automated transformation to create business process design skeletons out of the Policy-extended Formal Tropos models. The paper also reports upon three pilot studies that were conducted as a first, though preliminary, empirical test of our approach. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. References 1 Harrington HJ. Business process improvement: The breakthrough strategy for total quality, productivity, and competitiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991. 2 Hammer M, Champy J. Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. New York: HarperBusiness; 1994. xii, 257 pp. 3 Davenport T. Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1993. 4 Decreus K, Snoeck M, Poels G. Practical challenges for methods transforming i* goal models into business process models. In: 17th IEEE Int Requirements Engineering Conf. Atlanta, GA; 2009. 5 El Kharbili M, Stein S, Markovic I, Pulvermüller E. Towards a framework for semantic business process compliance management. In: M z M Shazia Sadiq (ed), Proc Workshop on Governance, Risk and Compliance for Information Systems (GRCIS 2008), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Montepellier, France; 2008: 1–15. 6 El Kharbili M, Stein S, Markovic I, Pulvermüller E. Towards policy-powered semantic enterprise compliance management. In: Proc 3rd Int Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management (SBPM), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Tenerife; June 2008: 16–21. 7 Hepp M, Roman D. An ontology framework for semantic business process management. Proc Wirtschaftsinformatik; 2007. 8 Fuxman A, Liu L, Mylopoulos J, Pistore M, Roveri M, Traverso P. Specifying and analyzing early requirements in Tropos. Requir Eng 2004; 9: 132–150. 9 OMG. Model driven architecture. Available at http://www.omg.org/mda/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 10 Guizzardi G. Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models. Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, Twente, The Netherlands 2005. 11 Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Yu E. From object-oriented to goal-oriented requirements analysis. Commun ACM 1999; 42(1): 31–37. 12 Kavakli E. Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A unifying framework. Requir Eng 2002; 6(4): 237–251. 13 Yu E. Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In: Proc Third IEEE Int Symp on Requir Eng, 1997. pp 226–235. 14 Ayala CP, Cares C, Carvallo JP, Grau G, Haya M, Salazar G, Franch X, Mayol E, Quer C. A comparative analysis of i*-based agent-oriented modeling languages. In: Proc Int Workshop on Agent-Oriented Software Development Methodology–SEKE Conf., Taipei, Taiwan; 2005. 15 Liu L, Yu E. Designing information systems in social context: A goal and scenario modelling approach. Inf Syst 2004; 29(2): 187–203. 16 Castro J, Kolp M, Mylopoulos J. Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: The Tropos project. Inf Syst 2002; 27(6): 365–389. 17 Fuxman A. Formal analysis of early requirements specifications, MSc thesis, University of Toronto, 2001. 18 Kagal L. A policy-based approach to governing autonomous behaviour in distributed environments. In: Proc Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, 2004. 19 Eclipse. EMF–-Eclipse modelling framework. Available at http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 20 Eclipse. GMF–-Graphical modeling framework. Available at http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 21 Eclipse. ATL–-ATLAS transformation language. Available at http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 22 Alanen M, Porres I. A relation between context-free grammars and meta object facility metamodels. TUCS Technical Report No 606, March 2003. 23 SUPER. Business Process Modelling Ontology v2. Available at http://www.ip-super.org/ontologies/process/bpmo/v2.0.1. 2009. 24 SUPER. D5.1: Semantic process modelling environment. Available at www.super-ip.org. Accessed October 1, 2009. 25 Decreus K, Poels G. Mapping semantically enriched Formal Tropos to business process models. In: Proc ACM SAC 2009 (Hawaii)–Track RE 2009. 26 Wieringa R. Requirements researchers: Are we really doing research? Requir Eng 2005; 10(4): 304–306. 27 Montesi M, Lago P. Software engineering article types: An analysis of the literature. J Syst Softw 2008; 81(10): 1694–1714. 28 Zelkowitz MV, Wallace DR. Experimental models for validating technology. Computer 1998; 31(5): 23–31. 29 Siau K, Rossi M. Evaluation techniques for systems analysis and design modelling methods–-a review and comparative analysis. Inf Syst J 2007: 1–20. 30 Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods, 2nd edition: Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1994. 31 van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. The importance of pilot studies. Social Science Research Update, University of Surrey, UK 2003; 35. Available at http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU35.html. 32 van Teijlingen ER, Rennie AM, Hundley V, Graham W. The importance of conducting and reporting pilot studies: The example of the Scottish Births Survey. J Adv Nursing 2001; 34: 289–295. 33 Prescott PA, Soeken KL. The potential uses of pilot work. Nursing Res 1989; 38(1): 60. 34 Turner R. The role of pilot studies in reducing risk on projects and programmes. Int J Proj Manage 2005; 23(1): 1–6. 35 Glass RL. Pilot studies: what, why and how. J Syst Softw 1997; 36(1): 85–97. 36 Bleistein S, Cox K, Verner J, Phalp K. Requirements engineering for e-business advantage. Requir Eng 2006; 11(1): 4–16. 37 Bleistein SJ, Cox K, Verner J. Validating strategic alignment of organizational IT requirements using goal modeling and problem diagrams. J Syst Softw 2006; 79(3): 362–378. 38 Bleistein SJ, Cox K, Verner J, Phalp KT. B-SCP: A requirements analysis framework for validating strategic alignment of organizational IT based on strategy, context, and process. Inf Softw Technol 2006; 48(9): 846–868. 39 Cox K, Phalp KT, Bleistein SJ, Verner JM. Deriving requirements from process models via the problem frames approach. Inf Softw Technol 2005; 47(5): 319–337. 40 OMG. Business motivation model. Available at http://www.omg.org/spec/BMM/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 41 Yu ES-K. Modelling strategic relationships for process reengineering. Toranto, Canada: University of Toronto; 1995. p 181. 42 Ould MA. Business processes: Modelling and analysis for reengineering and improvement. New York: Wiley; 1995. 43 Koliadis G, Ghose A. Relating business process models to goal-oriented requirements models in KAOS. In: Pacific-Rim Knowledge Acquisition Workshop 2006 (PKAW-2006). pp 25–39. 44 Koliadis G, Vranesevic A, Bhuiyan M, Krishna A, Ghose A. Combining i* and BPMN for business process model lifecycle management. In: BPM Workshops; 2006. pp 416–427. 45 Koliadis G, Vranesevic A, Bhuiyan M, Krishna A, Ghose AK. A combined approach for supporting the business process model lifecycle. In: Proc Asia-Pacific Conf on Information Systems; 2006. 46 OMG. BPMN 1.2 specification . Available at http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/1.2/. Accessed October 1, 2009. 47 Dardenne A, Lamsweerde Av, Fickas S. Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci Comput Program 1993; 20(1–2): 3–50. 48 Lapouchnian A, Yu Y, Mylopoulos J. Requirements-driven design and configuration management of business processes. Bus Process Manage 2007. p 246–261. 49 OASIS. Web services business process execution language, version 2.0. Available at http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2009. 50 Grau G, Franch X, Maiden NAM. PRiM: An i*-based process reengineering method for information systems specification. Inf Softw Technol 2008; 50(1–2): 76–100. 51 Frankova G, Yautsiukhin A, Séguran M. From Early Requirements to Business Processes With Service Level Agreements. Technical Report #DIT-07-037. University of Trento; 2007. 52 Séguran M, Hébert C, Frankova G. Secure workflow development from early requirements analysis. In: Proc The 6th IEEE European Conf on Web Services; 2008. 53 Giorgini P, Massacci F, Mylopoulos J, Zannone N. Requirements engineering for trust management: Model, methodology, and reasoning. Int J Inf Secur 2006; 5(4): 257–274. 54 Aburub F, Odeh M, Beeson I. Modelling non-functional requirements of business processes. Inf Softw Technol 2007; 49(11–12): 1162–1171. 55 Soffer P, Rolland C. Combining intention-oriented and state-based process modeling. Conceptual Modeling–ER 2005; 2005. p 47–62. 56 Rolland C, Prakash N, Benjamen A. A multi-model view of process modelling. Requir Eng 1999; 4(4): 169–187. 57 Soffer P, Wand Y. On the notion of soft-goals in business process modeling. Bus Process Manage J 2005; 11: 663–679. 58 Ghanavati S, Amyot D, Peyton L. Towards a framework for tracking legal compliance in healthcare. Adv Inf Syst Eng 2007: 218–232. 59 Ghanavati S, Amyot D, Peyton L. Compliance analysis based on a goal-oriented requirement language evaluation methodology. In: Proc 17th IEEE Int Requirements Engineering Conf (RE'09), 2009. pp 133–142. 60 Ghanavati S, Siena A, Perini A, Amyot D, Peyton L, Susi A. A legal perspective on business: Modeling the impact of law. E-Technologies: Innovation in an Open World; Proceedings of 4th International Conference, MCETECH 2009, Ottawa, Canada, May 4–6, 2009. pp 267–278. 61 Amyot D. Introduction to the user requirements notation: Learning by example. Comput Netw 2003; 42(3): 285–301. 62 Breaux TD, Vail MW, Anton AI. Towards regulatory compliance: Extracting rights and obligations to align requirements with regulations. In: Proc 14th IEEE Int Requirements Engineering Conf, 2006. pp 49–58. 63 Breaux T, Anton A. Analyzing regulatory rules for privacy and security requirements. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 2008; 34(1): 5–20. 64 Breaux TD, Anton AI, Doyle J. Semantic parameterization: A process for modeling domain descriptions. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 2008; 18(2): 1–27. 65 Breaux TD, Anton AI. Analyzing goal semantics for rights, permissions, and obligations. In: Proc 13th IEEE Int Conf on Requirements Engineering: IEEE Computer Society; 2005. 66 Kiyavitskaya N, Zeni N, Breaux T, Antón A, Cordy J, Mich L, Mylopoulos J. Automating the extraction of rights and obligations for regulatory compliance. Conceptual Modeling–ER 2008; 2008. p 154–168. 67 Breaux TD, Anton AI, Spafford EH. A distributed requirements management framework for legal compliance and accountability. Comput Secur 2009; 28(1–2): 8–17. 68 Anton AI, Earp JB, He Q, Stufflebeam W, Bolchini D, Jensen C. Financial privacy policies and the need for standardization. IEEE Educ Act Dep 2004: 36–45. 69 Antón AI, Earp JB, Carter RA. Precluding incongruous behavior by aligning software requirements with security and privacy policies. Inf Softw Technol 2003; 45(14): 967–977. 70 Darimont R, Lemoine M. Goal-oriented analysis of regulations. International Workshop on Regulations Modelling and their Verification & Validation. Luxemburg; 2006. 71 Siena A, Maiden N, Lockerbie J, Karlsen K, Perini A, Susi A. Exploring the effectiveness of normative i* modelling: Results from a case study on food chain traceability. Adv Inf Syst Eng 2008: 182–196. 72 Rifaut A, Dubois E. Using goal-oriented requirements engineering for improving the quality of ISO/IEC 15504 based compliance assessment frameworks. In: Proc 2008 16th IEEE Int Requirements Engineering Conf: IEEE Computer Society; 2008. 73 Bandara A, Lupu E, Moffett J, Russo A. A goal-based approach to policy refinement. In: Proc Fifth IEEE Int Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks; 2004. 74 van Lamsweerde A. Requirements engineering in the year 00: A research perspective. Proc 22nd ICSE. Limerick, Ireland: ACM; 2000. Citing Literature Volume25, Issue8Special Issue: Goal‐driven Requirements EngineeringAugust 2010Pages 784-812 ReferencesRelatedInformation