scieee Science in your language
[en] (orig)
R. Kaschek et al. (Eds.): UNISCON 2008, LNBIP 5, pp. 72–83, 2008.
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive
Process-Aware Information Systems∗
Peter Dadam, Manfred Reichert, Stefanie Rinderle, Martin Jurisch, Hilmar Acker,
Kevin Göser, Ulrich Kreher, and Markus Lauer
Ulm University, Institute of Databases and Information Systems,
James-Franck-Ring, 89081 Ulm, Germany
{peter.dadam,manfred.reichert,stefanie.rinderle,
martin.jurisch,hilmar.acker,kevin.goeser,ulrich.kreher,
markus.lauer}@uni-ulm.de
Abstract. If current process management systems shall be applied to a broad
spectrum of applications, they will have to be significantly improved with re-
spect to their technological capabilities. Particularly, in dynamic environments
it must be possible to quickly implement and deploy new processes, to enable
ad-hoc modifications of running process instances on-the-fly (e.g., to dynami-
cally add, delete or move process steps), and to support process schema evolu-
tion with instance migration (i.e., to propagate process schema changes to
already running instances if desired). These requirements must be met without
affecting process consistency and by preserving the robustness of the process
management system. In this paper we describe how these challenges have been
addressed and solved in the ADEPT2 Process Management System. Our overall
vision is to provide a next generation process management technology which
can be used in a variety of application domains.
1 Introduction
More and more contemporary information systems (IS) have to be aligned in a proc-
ess-oriented way. This new generation of IS is often referred to as Process-Aware IS
(PAIS) [1]. Recently, numerous technologies and paradigms have emerged in this
context such as Workflow Management, Business Process Management, Enterprise
Application Integration, and Service-oriented Architectures (SOA). They all focus on
the realization of PAIS [1]. By offering system-based support for implementing busi-
ness processes, these technologies aim at an increased efficiency and adaptivity of
enterprises regarding their internal processes. By combining process management
with SOA the interaction between enterprises and their customers and partners shall
be improved as well.
To provide effective process support, PAIS should capture real-world processes
adequately, i.e., there should be no mismatch between the computerized processes and
those in reality. To achieve this, PAIS enabling technologies must fulfill a number of
requirements:
∗ The development of ADEPT2 was funded by the State of Baden-Württemberg as part of the
AristaFlow project (see www.AristaFlow.de).
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 73
1. They must cover a broad spectrum of applications ranging from form- or docu-
ment-centered workflows to complex production workflows (where application in-
tegration constitutes a major task).
2. They must allow for the rapid and cost-effective implementation of a large variety
of business processes.
3. The implemented processes must run in a robust and stable manner. The overall
objective should be "robustness by design".
4. PAIS must not lead to rigidity and freeze existing business processes. Instead, they
must allow authorized users to flexibly deviate from the predefined processes as
required (e.g., to deal with exceptions). Such ad-hoc process changes should be
enabled at a high level of abstraction and without affecting robustness of the PAIS.
5. Due to process optimization or legal changes PAIS implementations evolve over
time Respective process changes have to be accomplished in an easy and cost-
effective way. For long-running processes the "on-the-fly” adaptation of already
running process instances to the new process schema should be possible as well.
Today's Workflow Management System
Appl.
Fct. 1
Appl.
Fct. 2
Appl.
Fct. 3
Appl.
Fct. 4
data flow adj. graph transf.
schema mod.consist. check
time mgt.
instance migr.
move node
delete node
ADEPT2 Process Management System
insert node ... ...
... log mgt. ...
a) required flexibility must be pre-modeled or
implemented as part of the application function additional complexity and overhead
b) functionality provided by the
process management system additional complexity and overhead
Today's Workflow Management System
Appl.
Fct. 1
Appl.
Fct. 2
Appl.
Fct. 3
Appl.
Fct. 4
Today's Workflow Management System
Appl.
Fct. 1
Appl.
Fct. 1
Appl.
Fct. 2
Appl.
Fct. 3
Appl.
Fct. 3
Appl.
Fct. 4
Appl.
Fct. 4
data flow adj. graph transf.
schema mod.consist. check
time mgt.
instance migr.
move node
delete node
ADEPT2 Process Management System
insert node ... ...
... log mgt. ... data flow adj. graph transf.
schema mod.consist. check
time mgt.
instance migr.
move node
delete node
ADEPT2 Process Management System
insert node ... ...
... log mgt. ...
a) required flexibility must be pre-modeled or
implemented as part of the application function additional complexity and overhead
additional complexity and overhead
b) functionality provided by the
process management system additional complexity and overhead
additional complexity and overhead
Fig. 1. Overhead caused by realizing system functions within the application programs is
avoided by providing the required functionality as integral part of the ADEPT2 system
Off-the-shelf process management systems do not meet these requirements or offer
restricted features [1,2]. Several vendors promise flexible process support, but are
unable to cope with fundamental issues related to process change (e.g., correctness).
Most systems, however, completely lack support for deviating from the predefined
processes in an ad-hoc manner or for migrating process instances to a changed proc-
ess schema. Thus, application developers are forced to "enrich" applications with
respective process support functions to deal with these limitations. This, in turn, ag-
gravates PAIS development and maintenance significantly and shifts the risk of errors
and the task to deal with them to application developers or end-users.
74 P. Dadam et al.
This paper presents the ADEPT2 process management system – one of the leading
technologies for realizing flexible and adaptive processes. Using ADEPT2, process-
oriented applications can be composed out of existing application components in a
plug & play like fashion, and then be flexibly executed at run-time. The ADEPT2
technology enables support for a broad spectrum of processes, ranging from simple
document-centered workflows to complex production workflows, which integrate
heterogeneous, distributed application components. We illustrate how ad-hoc changes
of single process instances as well as process schema changes with (optional) propa-
gation of these changes to the running instances are supported by ADEPT2 in an
integrated, safe, and easy-to-use manner. In particular, application programmers and
users of the ADEPT2 system are not confronted with the inherent complexity coming
with dynamic changes (as indicated in Fig. 1a). Instead, this functionality is easy to
use since it is an integral part of ADEPT2.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Sect. 2 sketches how process
composition is realized based on plug & play. In Sect. 3 we show how ad-hoc process
adaptations can be accomplished by end users and how the interaction between the
user and the ADEPT2 system looks like. In Sec. 4 we discuss process schema changes
and the adaptations of already running process instances. Sect. 5 describes the current
status of the ADEPT2 technology and Sect. 6 discusses current trends and related
work. We close with a summary and an outlook in Sec. 7.
2 Process Composition by Plug & Play
A new process can be realized by creating a process template (also denoted as process
schema). Such a template describes the planned order of the process steps (e.g., se-
quential, parallel, alternative paths, loops, etc.) as well as the data flow between them.
It either has to be defined from scratch or an existing template is chosen from the
process template repository and adapted as needed ("process cloning"). Afterwards
application functions (e.g., web services, Java components, ERP functions, or legacy
applications) have to be assigned to the process steps. When using the ADEPT2 proc-
ess editor, these functions can be selected from the component repository and be in-
serted into the process template by drag & drop (cf. Figure 2). Following this,
ADEPT2 analyzes whether the application functions can be connected in the desired
order; e.g., we check whether the input parameters of application functions can be
correctly supplied for all possible execution paths imposed by the process schema.
Furthermore, additional checks are performed in order to exclude deadlocks, live-
locks, etc. Only those process templates passing these correctness checks may be
released and transferred to the ADEPT2 runtime system.
When dragging application components from the repository and assigning them to
particular steps in the process template, the process designer does not need to have
detailed knowledge about the implementation of these components. Instead the com-
ponent repository provides an integrated, homogeneous view as well as access to the
different components. Internally, this is based on a set of wrappers provided for the
different types of application components. The chosen architecture will allow to add
new wrappers if new component types shall be supported. Currently, the ADEPT2
Execution Environment Framework allows to integrate different kinds of application
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 75
components like electronic forms, stand-alone executables, web services, Java library
functions, and function calls to legacy systems. All these application components
require different treatment when interacting with them.
Process
Templates
Application
Functions
Repository
Process
Templates
Application
Functions
Repository
Fig. 2. Composition of correct processes using plug & play
3 Support of Ad-Hoc Adaptations
Composing processes in a plug & play like fashion is very useful for developers since it
allows for rapid implementation of new processes. However, composition support alone
does not constitute a big technological progress when compared to the state-of-the-art. If
process management technolgy shall become applicable to a broader spectrum of appli-
cations than today, it must allow for ad-hoc deviations from the pre-defined process
schema as well. Such runtime changes must not violate workflow correctness. Further,
authorized users should be able apply ad-hoc changes in an intuitive way to.
Figure 3a – h illustrate how the interaction between the ADEPT2 system and the
end user may look like. In this example it is assumed that during the execution of a
particular process instance (e.g., the treatment of a certain patient under risk) an addi-
tional lab test becomes necessary. Assume that this has not been foreseen at buildtime
(cf. Fig. 3a). As a consequence, this particular process instance will have to be indi-
vidually adapted if the change request is approved by the system. After the user has
pressed the "exception button" (cf. Fig. 3b), he can specify the type of the intended
ad-hoc change (cf. Fig. 3c). If an insert operation shall be applied, for example, the
system will display the application functions that can be added in the given context
(cf. Fig. 3d). These can be simple or complex application components (e.g., "write
letter” or "send email” vs. application services), interactive or automatic functions, or
even complete processes.
Now the user simply has to state after which step(s) in the workflow the execution
of the newly added activity shall be started and before which step(s) it shall be fin-
ished (cf. Fig. 3e). Finally, the system checks whether resulting process instance ad-
aptations are valid (cf. Figure 3f and Figure 3g).
In this context, the same checks are performed as during the process design phase
(e.g., absence of deadlocks or validity of actor assignment expressions). In addition,
the current process instance state is taken into account when the instance is modified.
76 P. Dadam et al.
Examinations
Wallace, Edgar
Smith, Karl
Miller, Anne
Jones, Isabelle
Exceptional case –
we need an additional
lab test !
Examinations
Wallace, EdgarWallace, Edgar
Smith, KarlSmith, Karl
Miller, AnneMiller, Anne
Jones, IsabelleJones, Isabelle
Exceptional case –
we need an additional
lab test !
Examinations
Wallace, Edgar
Smith, Karl
Miller, Anne
Jones, Isabelle
Exception
Examinations
Wallace, EdgarWallace, Edgar
Smith, KarlSmith, Karl
Miller, AnneMiller, Anne
Jones, IsabelleJones, Isabelle
Exception
a) An exception occurs b) User presses the "exception button"
Examinations
Wallace, Edgar
Smith, Karl
Miller, Anne
Jones, Isabelle
Exception
Insert task?
Delete task?
Shift task?
Examinations
Wallace, EdgarWallace, Edgar
Smith, KarlSmith, Karl
Miller, AnneMiller, Anne
Jones, IsabelleJones, Isabelle
Exception
Insert task?
Delete task?
Shift task?
Select Activity
Schedule counsel examination
Lab Test
Prepare patient for operation
Inform patient
Wash patient
Schedule examination date
.........
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
Select Activity
Schedule counsel examination
Lab Test
Prepare patient for operation
Inform patient
Wash patient
Schedule examination date
.........
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
c) User selects type of the ad-hoc change d) User selects step to be inserted
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
End
Start
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
Start immediately,
,results are
needed before explanation of
operation risks
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
EndEnd
StartStart
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
Start immediately,
,results are
needed before explanation of
operation risks
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
End
Start
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
ADEPT
Checking if insertion
of step is possible
- Please wait -
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
End
Start
EndEnd
StartStart
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
ADEPT
Checking if insertion
of step is possible
- Please wait -
ADEPT
Checking if insertion
of step is possible
- Please wait -
e) User specifies where to insert the step f) System checks validity of the change
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
End
Start
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
ADEPT
Insertion is possible!
Great !!
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
End
Start
EndEnd
StartStart
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
ADEPT
Insertion is possible!
ADEPT
Insertion is possible!
Great !!
Lab Test
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
OK, now let us
continue with the
examination !
Lab TestLab Test
Examinations
U Wallace, Edgar
U Miller, Anne
U Smith, Karl
U Jones, Isabelle
Explanation
Operation Risks
X-Ray
Check
Anesthesiology
Examination
OK, now let us
continue with the
examination !
g) Change can be applied h) User continues work
Fig. 3. Executing an ad-hoc modification from the end user's point of view
On the one hand this allows for modifications which would not be valid at design time
(e.g., due to uncertainty at design time which execution branches will be taken). On
the other hand the process state also restricts possible changes (see [3] for details).
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 77
All implemented change operations are also available via the ADEPT2 application
programming interface. Furthermore, changes can be specified at a semantically high
level of abstraction (e.g. "Insert Step X between Node Set 1 and Node Set 2"), which
eases change definition significantly [2]. All these operations are guarded by pre-
conditions which are automatically checked by the system when the operation is in-
voked. The related post conditions guarantee that the resulting process instance graph
is again "problem-free". Users or application programs only interact via these high
level API functions with ADEPT2. They never do have to manipulate system-internal
states directly (see [4] for details).
For several reasons (e.g., change traceability) ADEPT2 stores process instance
changes within so called change logs. Together with the enactment logs, which cap-
ture the execution information of process instances, the structure and state of a parti-
cular process instance can be reconstructed at any time. This log information is also a
valuable source for process optimizations because repeatedly performed ad-hoc mo-
difications may be an indicator that the process has been not optimally designed [5].
4 On Supporting Process Schema Evolution
Though the support of ad-hoc modifications is very important, it is not yet sufficient.
In the context of long-running business processes, it is often required to adapt the
process schema itself (e.g., due to organizational changes in the company or because
of business process optimizations). In this case all process instances based on this
process schema may be affected by the change. If the processes are of short duration
only, already running process instances usually can be finished according to the old
schema version. However, this strategy will be not applicable for long running busi-
ness processes. Then the old process version may no longer be applicable, e.g., when
legal regulations have changed or when the old process reveals severe problems. One
solution would be to individually modify each of the running process instances by
applying corresponding ad-hoc changes (as described in the previous section). How-
ever, this would be too expensive and error-prone if a multitude of running process
instances had been involved. Note that the number of active process instances may
become very large; i.e., change propagation must be accomplished in a very efficient
manner for hundreds or thousands of process instances.
An adaptive process management system must be able to support correct changes
of a process schema and their subsequent propagation to already running process
instances if desired. In other words, if a process schema is changed and thus a new
version of this schema is created, process instances should be allowed to migrate to
the new schema version (i.e., to be transferred and re-linked to the new process
schema version). In this context, it is of particular importance that ad-hoc changes of
single process instances and instance migrations do not exclude each other since both
kinds of changes are needed for the support of long-running processes!
The ADEPT2 technology implements the combined handling of both kinds of
changes. Process instances which have been individually modified can be also mi-
grated to a changed process schema if this does not cause inconsistencies or errors in
the sequel. All needed correctness checks (on the schema and the state of the
78 P. Dadam et al.
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth ori zation
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth ori zation
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth ori zation
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth ori zation
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
check instancesstates!
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Se rver
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Queuing
Time MgmtAuthorization
Std Client A PI We b Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModeling API
Admin. API
Reco very Audit Trail ...
check instancesstates!
a) Process schema change b) Check state of running process instances
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
Response:
4.238 Instances can be automatically
migrated to schema S
new
1.117 Instances have proceeded too far
for a migration, remain on schema S
old
112 Instances cannot be automatically
migrated due to conflicting ad-hoc
changes, remain on schema S
old
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendunge n / Application Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAuth orization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIModelin g API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
Response:
4.238 Instances can be automatically
migrated to schema S
new
1.117 Instances have proceeded too far
for a migration, remain on schema S
old
112 Instances cannot be automatically
migrated due to conflicting ad-hoc
changes, remain on schema S
old
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
performmigrations!
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
Repository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
ADEPT Process
Composer
…
ADEPT2 Process
Composer
Create Process Template
Modify Process Template
Check Process Template
…
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
RepositoryRepository
Process
Templates Application
Functions
Process Designer /
Process Administrator
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
...
Anwendu ngen / Applic ation Server
Process 4
Process 3
Process 2
Process 1
Process 6
Process 5
Process 11
Process 10
Process 9
Process 8
Process 7
Process 14
Process 13
Process 12
ADEPT Process Management System
Process Execution Engine
Msg Que uing
Time MgmtAu thorization
Std Client API Web Clnt API
Role Mgmt
Dyn. Change APIM odeling API
Admin. API
Recovery Audit Trail ...
performmigrations!
c) Result of checks d) Execute instance migration
Fig. 4. Process schema evolution
instances) and all adaptations to be accomplished when migrating the instances to the
new process schema version are performed by ADEPT2. The implementation is based
on a comprehensive formal framework [3, 6]. Based on it, ADEPT2 can precisely
state under which conditions a certain process instance can be migrated to the new
process schema version. This allows for checking the compliance of a collection of
process instances with the changed schema version in an efficient manner. Finally,
concurrent and conflicting changes at the process type and the process instance level
are managed in a reliable and consistent manner as well. In particular, long-running
processes will benefit from this close integration of the different change levels.
Figure 4a – Figure 4c illustrate how such a process schema evolution is conducted
from the user’s point of view in ADEPT2. The process designer loads the process
schema from the process template repository, adapts it (using the ADEPT2 process
editor), and creates a new schema version (cf. Figure 4a). Then the system checks
whether the running process instances can be correctly migrated to the new process
schema version (cf. Figure 4b and Figure 4c). These checks are based on state condi-
tions and structural comparisons. Furthermore, the system calculates which adapta-
tions become necessary to perform the migration at the process instance level. The
ADEPT2 system analyzes all running instances of the old schema and creates a list of
instances which can be migrated as well as a list of instances for which this is not
possible (together with a report which explains the different judgments). When press-
ing the "migration button” the system automatically conducts the migration for all
selected process instances (see Figure 4d).
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 79
5 On Transferring the ADEPT2 Technology to Business
The vision of enabling ad-hoc modifications within the process management system
in a correct and consistent manner was the starting point for our research and imple-
mentation work done within the ADEPT project more than 10 years ago [4]. The
resulting technology has been integrated in the experimental ADEPT1 system which,
to our best knowledge, is still leading in the field of adaptive process management
today. The ADEPT1 technology has enabled ad-hoc deviations in a controlled, secure,
and user-friendly manner. Unforeseen exceptions can be handled within the PAIS and
not by bypassing it as often required when using commercial process management
systems. The ADEPT1 system has been used in several national and international
research projects.
From these projects we gained valuable insights into the practical needs for process
management technology on the one side, and we learned many lessons about imple-
menting a complex system such as ADEPT1 on the other side. Partly these "lessons
learned” have been published covering topics like log management, system-internal
representation of process schemas and process instances, and the transfer of selected
implementation concepts to other application areas such as data warehouses [7-9].
One important perception is that the system design and architecture should offer pow-
erful functionality at a semantically high level and hide the inherent complexity as
much as possible from the user.
To transfer the ADEPT2 technology into industrial usage and business, the Arista-
Flow GmbH was jointly founded by members of our institute and industrial partners
(see [10] for details). The major focus of this company is to implement a robust and
scalable commercial version of the ADEPT2 system. ADEPT2 includes all function-
ality of the old ADEPT1 system. Ad-hoc flexibility is now based on a broader range
of supported operations, however. In addition, ADEPT2 realizes the composition of
processes based on plug & play techniques as sketched in Section 2. Furthermore, it
implements the theoretical framework for process schema evolution as outlined in
Section 4. Altogether, the design and implementation of such a powerful and innova-
tive system constitutes a big challenge. However, we can now exploit our lessons
learned from implementing the ADEPT1 system. Finally, we benefit very much from
the cooperation with our industrial partners and the University of Mannheim within
the AristaFlow project (see [10] for details).
6 Current Trends and Related Work
This section discusses current trends and approaches from literature and relates them
to ADEPT2:
Plug & Play: Recently, lots of attention has been paid to the area of (dynamic) web
service composition [11,13]. In particular, the emergence of WS-BPEL (Business
Process Execution Language) has resulted in many research activities (e.g., on match
making [12]) as well as new process composition tools and service flow engines
(e.g., IBM WebSphere Process Server or SAP Netweaver). How to provide intelligent
support for finding the right web services or partners, however, has not been a
80 P. Dadam et al.
research topic in ADEPT2 so far. Nevertheless, the basic functionality for composing
services in a process-oriented way is already provided by ADEPT2 as described in
Section 2. In particular, ADEPT2 is able to invoke any kind of standard component
(including web services and Java components); it further offers powerful interfaces to
integrate arbitrary application components with little programming effort.
Process Choreography & Orchestration. Though a distributed variant of ADEPT1,
which supports distributed process execution, has been developed [14, 15] and some
attention was paid to inter-workflow coordination [16, 17], the focus of ADEPT2 is on
orchestration; i.e., on the coordination and enactment of (business) processes from the
viewpoint of one company. Opposed to that, conversation languages like WS-CDL or
WSCI have been designed for defining the choreography of different partner processes
(i.e., for global processes where each partner runs an internal process and provides a
public view on it based on which it exchanges messages with partners).
A promising integration variant of ADEPT2 with such web service standards is
conceivable: While ADEPT2 defines and manages internal (i.e., private) processes,
WS-BPEL can be used for describing public process views and WS-CDL for defining
the choreography of partner processes based on these public views (i.e., the global
protocol based on which the processes of the different partners communicate). The
advantage of this approach would be that with ADEPT2 any application component
and particularly interactive process steps can be called within the internal processes.
This is useful since internal processes typically comprise a mix of interactive and
automated activities as well as a variety of different application functions such as Java
components, Web services, but also complex ERP system functions. Using the
ADEPT2 technology the correctness of the modeled (plugged) processes can be guar-
anteed based on the formal checks on, for example, control and data flow.
Adaptive Process Management: The flexible support of business processes has been a
hot topic in research for a long time. Mostly, approaches either deal with ad-hoc de-
viations at process instance level or process schema evolution [3, 18, 19]. The same
applies for commercial systems offering some, but very limited flexibility (e.g.,
Staffware or Ultimus Workflow). Only few approaches and prototypes [20, 21, 22]
allow for both kinds of process changes, but in an isolated manner. To our best
knowledge, ADEPT2 is the only adaptive PMS which supports ad-hoc deviations,
process schema evolution, and their interplay based on a sound theoretical framework
and within one implemented system.
Finally, several approaches exist that allow to define “placeholder activities” in a
process model for which a concrete sub-process can be bound or modeled during
runtime. Representatives of this system category include PocketsOfFlexibility [23]
and Worklets [24]. Typically, late modeling has to be finished before creating the
corresponding sub-process instance. Though late binding and late modeling increase
process flexibility (see [2] for a detailed discussion), they do not allow for structural
changes of already running instances. Recently a list of change patterns and change
support features have emerged, which allow to systematically compare change and
flexibility support in existing PAIS [2].
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 81
7 Summary and Outlook
The ADEPT2 technology meets major requirements claimed for next generation
adaptive process management systems: it provides advanced functionality to support
process composition by plug & play of arbitrary application components, it enables
ad-hoc flexibility for process instances without losing control (i.e., without causing
process execution errors or inconsistencies), and it supports process schema evolution
in a controlled and efficient manner. As opposed to many other approaches all these
aspects work in interplay as well. For example, it is possible to propagate process
schema changes to individually modified process instances or to dynamically com-
pose processes out of existing application components. All in all such a complex
system requires a sound theoretical framework in order to avoid incomplete solutions
and implementation gaps [3-5]. Finally, it is important to mention that most of our
theoretical results have not been just kept "on paper”, but have been implemented
within the process management systems ADEPT1 and ADEPT2 respectively. As
ADEPT2 additionally provides powerful tools and application programming inter-
faces its transfer to and its use in practice will be further eased.
In addition to the features presented in this paper, the ADEPT2 technology offers
promising perspectives for process learning and continuous process optimization
[5, 26]. In particular, audit data (i.e., process logs) become much more meaningful,
since they do not only capture process execution events (e.g., start / completion of
activities), but also contain insightful information on performed ad-hoc changes at the
process instance level [8]. By mining the change logs related to a collection of indi-
vidually modified process instances, we can (semi-)automatically derive potential
process improvements (i.e., changes to be applied to the original process schema).
Recently, we have started working on process change mining, and first project
results indicate the new opportunities emerging in this context [26]. Furthermore,
process schema adaptations derived with respective mining techniques can be imple-
mented with ADEPT2 in a much quicker and more cost effective way when compared
to existing technology. Thus, continuous process evolution and full process lifecycle
support become possible. Finally, other interesting perspectives arise when intro-
ducing adaptive process management to practice. This includes the support for emer-
gent processes [30], the “outsourcing” of successfully applied exception handling
procedures to knowledge management components [5, 27], the automatic, rule-based
adaptation of process instances [28, 29], or the support of ad-hoc workflows.
In future work we will incorporate more semantic knowledge into the ADEPT2
framework, i.e., it shall become possible to specify semantical integrity constraints on
business processes [25]. We also aim at providing efficient methods to check the valid-
ity of such semantic constraints when changing processes. Following such a constraint-
based approach it becomes possible to not only guarantee that processes run correctly
regarding their control and data flow, but also regarding the validity of the specified
semantic constraints. As another important task we will elaborate the use of ADEPT2 in
different practical settings and application areas (e.g., healthcare [31,32]).
82 P. Dadam et al.
References
1. Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A.: Process-aware Information Systems. John
Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2005)
2. Weber, B., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: Change Patterns and Change Support Features in
Process-Aware Information Systems. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE
2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 574–588. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
3. Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Correctness Criteria for Dynamic Changes in Work-
flow Systems - A Survey. Data and Knowledge Engineering 50(1), 9–34 (2004)
4. Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex - Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows With-
out Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 10(2), 93–129 (1998)
5. Rinderle, S., Weber, B., Reichert, M., Wild, W.: Integrating Process Learning and Process
Evolution – A Semantic Based Approach. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B.,
Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 252–267. Springer, Heidel-
berg (2005)
6. Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Flexible Support Of Team Processes By Adaptive
Workflow Systems. Distributed and Parallel Databases 16(1), 91–116 (2004)
7. Rinderle, S., Kreher, U., Lauer, M., Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: On Representing Instance
Changes in Adaptive Process Management Systems. In: Proc. ProFlex 2006, First IEEE
Workshop on Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems, Manchester (2006)
8. Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Jurisch, M., Kreher, U.: On Representing, Purging, and Utiliz-
ing Change Logs in Process Management Systems. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth,
A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 241–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
9. Rinderle, S., Jurisch, M., Reichert, M.: On Deriving Net Change Information From Change
Logs - The DeltaLayer Algorithm. In: Proc. BTW 2007, Datenbanksysteme in Business,
Technologie und Web, Aachen. LNI, vol. 103, pp. 364–381 (2007)
10. http://www.AristaFlow.com (AristaFlow GmbH), http://www.AristaFlow.de (AristaFlow
project)
11. Khalaf, R., Mukhi, N., Weerawarana, S.: Service-oriented composition in BPEL4WS. In:
Proc. WWW 2003, Budapest (2003)
12. Wombacher, A., Fankhauser, P., Mahleko, B., Neuhold, E.: Matchmaking for business
processes based on choreographies. IJWS 1(1), 14–32 (2004)
13. Yi, X., Kochut, K.J.: Process composition of web services with complex conversation pro-
tocols. In: Proc. Conf. on Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Distributed Systems Sym-
posium at Advanced Simulation Technology, pp. 141–148 (2004)
14. Bauer, T., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Intra-Subnet Load Balancing in Distributed Workflow
Management Systems. Int’l J. of Cooperative Information Systems 12(3), 205–223 (2003)
15. Bauer, T., Dadam, P.: A Distributed Execution Environment for Large-Scale Workflow
Management Systems with Subnets and Server Migration. In: Proc. CoopIS 1997, Kiawah
Island, South Carolina, USA, pp. 99–108 (1997)
16. Heinlein, C.: Synchronization of Concurrent Workflows Using Interaction Expressions and
Coordination Protocols. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., et al. (eds.) CoopIS 2002, DOA 2002,
and ODBASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2519, pp. 54–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
17. Heinlein, C.: Workflow and Process Synchronization with Interaction Expressions and
Graphs. In: Proc. ICDE 2001, Heidelberg, Germany, April 2001, pp. 243–252 (2001)
18. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Basten, T.: Inheritance of Workflows: An Approach to Tackling
Problems Related to Change. Theoretical Computer Science 270(1-2), 125–203 (2002)
19. Casati, F., Ceri, S., Pernici, B., Pozzi, G.: Workflow Evolution. Data & Knowledge Engi-
neering 24(3), 211–238 (1998)
Towards Truly Flexible and Adaptive Process-Aware Information Systems 83
20. Kochut, K., Arnold, J., Sheth, A., Miller, J., Kraemer, E., Arpinar, B., Cardoso, J.: Intelli-
GEN: A distributed workflow system for discovering protein-protein interactions. Distrib-
uted and Parallel Databases 13(1), 43–72 (2002)
21. Weske, M.: Formal Foundation and Conceptual Design of Dynamic Adaptations in a
Workflow Management System. In: Proc. HICSS-34, Maui, Hawaii, vol. 7, p. 7051 (2001)
22. Pesic, M., Schonenberg, M.H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Constraint-Based
Workflow Models: Change Made Easy. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part
I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 77–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
23. Sadiq, S., Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.: Pockets of flexibility in workflow specifications. In:
Kunii, H.S., Jajodia, S., Sølvberg, A. (eds.) ER 2001. LNCS, vol. 2224, pp. 513–526.
Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
24. Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.: Worklets: A service-
oriented implementation of dynamic flexibility in workflows. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z.
(eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 291–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
25. Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Semantic Correctness In Adaptive Process Management
Systems. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102,
pp. 193–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
26. Günther, C.W., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Change Mining in
Adaptive Process Management Systems. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2006.
LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 319–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
27. Weber, B., Wild, W., Breu, R.: CBRFlow: Enabling Adaptive Workflow Management
Through Conversational CBR. In: Funk, P., González Calero, P.A. (eds.) ECCBR 2004.
LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3155, pp. 434–448. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
28. Müller, R.: Event-oriented dynamic adaptation of workflows. Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Leipzig, Germany (2002)
29. Greiner, U.: Quality-oriented Execution and Optimization of Cooperative Processes:
Model and Algorithms. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leipzig, Germany (2005)
30. Jørgensen, H.D.: Interactive Process Models. Ph.D. Thesis, Norwegian University of Sci-
ence and Technology, Trondheim, Norway (2004)
31. Lenz, R., Reichert, M.: IT Support for Healthcare Processes - Premises, Challenges, Per-
spectives. Data and Knowledge Engineering 61, 39–58 (2007)
32. Dadam, P., Reichert, M., Kuhn, K.: Clinical Workflows - The Killer Application for Proc-
ess-oriented Information Systems? In: Proc. 4th Int’l Conf. on Business Information Sys-
tems (BIS 2000), Poznan, Poland, pp. 36–59 (2000)