Logo des Repositoriums

P254 - Modellierung 2016

https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/20930
Auflistung nach:

Auflistung P254 - Modellierung 2016 nach Autor:in "Becker, Jörg"

1 - 2 von 2
  • Konferenzbeitrag
    On the de-facto standard of event-driven process chains: how EPC is defined in literature
    (Modellierung 2016, 2016) Riehle, Dennis M.; Jannaber, Sven; Karhof, Arne; Thomas, Oliver; Delfmann, Patrick; Becker, Jörg
    The Business Process Modelling Notation (BPMN) and the Event-driven Process Chain (EPC) are both frequently used modelling languages to create business process models. While there is a well-defined standard for BPMN, such a standard is missing for EPC. As a standard would be beneficial to improve interoperability among different vendors, this paper aims at providing the means for future EPC standardization. Therefore, we have conducted a structured literature review of the most common EPC variants in IS research. We provide a structured overview of the evolution of different EPC variants, describe means and capabilities and elaborate different criteria for decision-making in regard to including EPC variants in a standardization process.
  • Konferenzbeitrag
    On the de-facto standard of event-driven process chains: reviewing EPC implementations in process modelling tools
    (Modellierung 2016, 2016) Karhof, Arne; Jannaber, Sven; Riehle, Dennis M.; Thomas, Oliver; Delfmann, Patrick; Becker, Jörg
    Nowadays, most process modelling tools implement popular modelling languages such as the Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) or the Event-driven Process Chain (EPC). However, in contrast to BPMN, no effort has yet been undertaken to standardize the EPC language, thus rendering EPCs as being merely a de-facto standard for business process modelling. Subsequently, this paper addresses this issue by laying ground for a successful EPC standardization. To achieve this task, several process modelling tools have been evaluated regarding their implementation of the EPC language with the objective to derive consensus about important language constructs. The evaluation reveals that there is a high degree of variety in the way tools implement EPCs. Especially syntax, semantic and pragmatic of the EPC language are not perceived homogenously and, in fact, commonly neglected. Hence, our research provides valuable implications for further EPC standardization by highlighting the state-of-the-art of the EPC from a software point of view.