Business process modeling is a tool to describe the end-to-end business process and not a performance output . The output of any business process diagram is considered as an improvement opportunity for any organization in the way their operation works. So the focus should be on differentiating value-added activities and improve them to reduce cost and time efforts, and ultimately to make customer experience and service better .
Business process models are differentiated into two types;
• As-is model – represent current state of business process
• To-be model – future state of business process
These process models are used for analysis and improvement and executed for further optimization. Besides the description, process modeling aims to enable company employees for a better understanding of operation workflow amongst each other and to streamline the process.
Varieties of modeling languages have long been used for describing processes . Flowchart, UML (Unified Modeling Language) diagram, EPC (Event-driven Process Chain), Petri Net, IDEF (Integration Definition for Function Modeling), DFD (Data Flow Diagram), RAD (Role Activity Diagram), YAWL (Yet Another Workflow Language), BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation) are few commonly used examples of process-oriented modeling techniques. But at present few of them are widely used because of their expressiveness and functional behavior. These languages are primarily used to describe operational workflow so many can easily understand, analyze and do positive changes via improvement in the process. Below discussed types are leading modeling techniques that many organizations have been using a process management tool to improve their business process performance.
A flow chart diagram represents the flow of control or algorithm during the course of the process, showing step by step sketch of various activities and their order by simple arrow connection. As a most popular diagramming type, flowchart has simple symbols that can easily understand by users. But due to lack of support for the breakdown of activities, the flowchart has limited usage. Flowcharts mainly used for software engineering but its simple nature attracts many managers and business developers to implement it in some administrative use as well.
UML (Unified Modeling Language) activity diagram represents logic or detailed logic of business rules which applied basically in business or software-based system domain. In a software system, UML diagram is used for specifications, development, visualization, and documentation. In the business profession, UML is considered as a powerful, flexible, and object-oriented technique to describe the detailed logic of business rules. Regardless of flexibility in modeling, UML is not popular among business analyst because of its semblance and multiplicity nature.
EPC diagram, short form for Event-driven Process chain diagram, is deliberated as a type of flowchart. Even though being the type of flowchart, EPC diagram gain ample popularity because of its occurrence in the configuration and implementation of SAP system especially Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) . Nowadays, EPC diagram is used for resource planning and to identify possible opportunities for business process improvement. Started from business process workflow outline generation incorporation with SAP R/3 solutions, EPC diagram, nowadays, used widely by many organizations for modeling, analysis, and process redesigning purpose . EPC diagram is supported by many elements like events, functions like activity or task, logical connectors, and responsibility functioning like process owner, organization etc.
Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) is now measured as a standard for the representation of an end-to-end business process in an expressive graphical way . In the beginning, BPMN technique was developed by Business Process Management Initiative (BPMI), an organization to promote the standardization of software enterprises . But after the unification of BPMI with OMG (Object Management Group), it is now maintained by the Object Management Group (OMG) . Nowadays, BPMN has received considerable attention from many process managers and business analysts as a convenient modeling technique for documentation and further execution of business processes to gain a competitive advantage in this dynamic market.
The primary objective of BPMN was to simplify communication and coordination among various departments inside organizations or company. BPMN varies from business process mapping as it is used for the representation of current business processes for purposes such as standardization, employee training activities, and quality administration. But now BPMN can likewise support UML, XML (Extensible Markup Language) and HTML documents intended for execution of business processes with visualization of standard and common notations across any organization.
Over the past few years, we have not seen any standard approach for modeling of business processes. But with the establishment of BPMN technique, BPMI, now OMG group has filled out that vacuum with the development of royalty-free graphical notation. With the variety of elements, BPMN targeted customer’s ranges from higher level business user to lower level implementers . With many amendments, finally, OMG was able to launch BPMN 2.0 version successfully, which is used as one single specification for all as it defines the graphical notation, metadata and interchange diagram layouts.
Every organization has sets of methodologies that govern their work towards development and improvement. Strategically, the methodology plays an important role to provide confidence to stakeholders (customers, employees, management etc.) that deliver projects profitably . Each methodology signifies a diverse measure for evaluation. With a clear question in mind i.e. for what purpose business process models are used in the organization, it is likely to begin working out which approach organization want.
Depending upon the focus of process description, modeling techniques should be capable of providing vital information of associated process. We evaluated most effective modeling techniques that discussed in previous section (Chapter 4.2) along two general points; (1) four different lookouts of business processes namely: behavioral, informational, functional and organizational, and (2) basic modeling elements that supported by each technique.
A business process modeling technique should be capable of representing one or more following process perspectives ,
• Behavioral: Signifies when and how actions are accomplished.
• Functional: Si
gnifies what activities are being accomplished.
• Organizational: Signifies where and by whom activities are executed.
• Informational: Signifies informational entities (data) produced or manipulated by a process and its interrelationship.
The intention of the evaluation is to gain further insights into the suitability of the modeling methods with regard to the visualization of modeling elements in subsequent chapters. A summary of the main results of the comparisons is presented at the end of the subsections broken down according to the criteria.
The results are in the tabular format summarized below. A rating can have three appearances minus 1 (-), zero (o) or plus 1 (+).
Table 4 above shows first phase assessment for suitable modeling techniques based on different lookouts of business processes. All three of the modeling techniques i.e. EPC, UML activity diagram and BPMN 2.0 studied here have a freely available meta-model and can, therefore, be extended at any time. They are therefore rated all three with a +. But BPMN 2.0 and UML activity diagram is favored by most of the business analyst and process managers because of their standardization prominence by OMG group. Most notable thing from above evaluation is that process-oriented modeling technique BPMN 2.0, however, succeeded faraway in terms of all four business process perspective with the highest score of +16.
From an organizational point of view, behavioral perspective plays a central role while selecting any modeling technique because it directly relates to organizational performance by managing the workflow among different functional units to optimize and improve their business processes. But a different modeling technique uses more or less the same graphical notations (elements) while modeling any process. There is no way of explaining which methods are best suited in terms of notation. In the second phase of evaluation, we will quantify the result of the first phase by comparing the availability of basic elements like events, functions, branches, and control, data and message flow, responsibilities, data and software systems in Flow Chart, EPC, BPMN and UML Activity diagram (see Table 5).
Above mentioned modeling methods are used by many organizations and considered as a standard for good documentation of business processes. They basically include freely accessible graphical notations and common terminology. Other modeling methods like RAD, DFD, Petri Net and many more, are out of questions because they do not fulfill the requirements set out here, for example, they are too difficult to learn, have limited regularity, or that their elements are already controlled in the methods mentioned above.
Event element group shows that EPC and Flowchart diagram provides the easiest graphical notation with just one symbol. However, defining only states can be possible here. The UML activity diagrams are provided with start and end element without any intermediate state i.e. no information carrier in the succession of the process. On the other hand, BPMN 2.0 diagram provides three notation elements for events i.e. start, intermediate and end event. All these symbols can be easily visualized and used. Thus, a variety of states in a process can be described and illustrated.
Function group shows that the graphical notation for EPC, BPMN 2.0 and UML are the same. But in case of BPMN 2.0 and EPC, there is a possibility to represent individual process steps as well as sub-processes or references to other processes. But the scope is limited to represent sub-process in UML activity diagram and it depends upon the software vendors who provide notations for modeling.
Gateway group shows that there is the only difference in the semantic understanding of the gateway elements. Thus, the EPC cannot subsequently use inclusive (OR) or exclusive (XOR) gateway due to the state of the event. Otherwise, all modeling methods offer an opportunity to run a process path exclusively or in parallel. In the case of BPMN 2.0, a variety of gateway elements is used to govern the workflow of the process. These elements represent fundamentally different symbols and a distinction is made based on circumstances of the incoming and/or outgoing workflow for branching and/or connecting, parallelization and/or synchronization, data conditions and/or futuristic circumstances.
Control, data, and message flow group shows that EPC and UML offer the possibility to model control, as well as data, flows except Flow Chart diagram. However, only BPMN 2.0 offers a well-integrated message flow in addition to controlling flow and data flow in its notation.
Communication Link group shows that BPMN 2.0 and UML offer the possibility of a visual differentiation by Swimlanes. Processes can thus be demonstrated very clearly within defined company boundaries and responsibility conversions can be easily pictured. With the EPC, functions can be assigned by a symbol of an organizational unit. To give a short impression of EPC element in comparison with Swimlanes, each activity would have to be assigned an organizational unit and quickly creates confusion among process modeling.
All modeling methods presented here are able to represent data and/or information. In BPMN 2.0, however, more data is demonstrated that objects of any kind. In addition to data objects and storage container, text annotations can be assigned to an activity, which increases the expressiveness. A software system can only symbolically express into the EPC and BPMN 2.0. The BPMN 2.0 is more focused towards workflow and information flow of the process and strongly geared into the modeling of the implementing software system. But in addition, BPMN 2.0 is enough adept to represent any software systems that involves any time during process accomplishment.
An evaluation based on four different viewpoints of any business process and supported modeling elements prove that OMG’s BPMN 2.0 standard notation is capable of addressing most substantial characteristics of BPM and it ranked best among the widely used process modeling methodologies. As shown above, all the modeling methods justify behavioral perspective criteria for an organization by using different graphical notations. However, approaching towards methodology selection for any organization, it becomes clear that BPMN 2.0 has most powerful and expressive notation for the description of any kind of processes. Describing processes in a standardized way by using BPMN 2.0 notation allows organizations to cover business as well as a technical view of any process on the same page . Business level modeling is used for demonstrating a high level of business abstraction and technical level modeling is used to complement technical details on the abstracted business level model . BPMN 2.0 graphical notation is simple to understand but complexes for modeling any business process. To work smart and take the advantage of BPMN 2.0 standard, the organization is needed a tool that matching organization requirements, easy to use for all stakeholders and smarter enough to generate modeling result.
Today, huge numbers of different business process modeling tools are available in the market that supports complete BPMN 2.0 standard. A comprehensive study from BPMN modeling reviews suggested that at least 70 software providers have application for the process modeling that uses BPMN 2.0 as a standard. In the earlier state, many business analyst or developers started using a drawing tool such as Camunda, MS Visio with same BPMN syntax and notations in their tool palette for documenting different business processes. But after the introduction of standard notation by OMG, view towards looking BPMN 2.0 tool has changed. Now many BPM vendors have developed their own business suit to support BPMN 2.0 standard and extended modeling scope from process documentation to process analysis, process simulation, process
monitoring, and process automation via workflow management.
Selection of best suitable BPMN 2.0 supported tool for any organization can be a complex process and it might have an indirect impact on organizations way of doing business as it requires substantial investment in time, money and employee training . However, evaluation for tool selection must be adequate that not only fulfill organization current needs but also covers the aspect of further process improvement and long-term future growth .
Considering methodological requirements discussed in an earlier section and various other perquisites like already in-house availability of tool, the global market of vendor i.e. market size, maximum customer base etc., we have elected six below major BPMN 2.0 providers for comparison. The technique used for tool evaluation is divided into two stages that range from functional support towards BPM approach to intuitive usage and tool smartness towards process modeling with BPMN 2.0 standard. We compared and measured those tools in tabular form (see Table 6 and Table 8) with regards to different user perspective that covers intuitive, functional and/or technical factors. A rating in below-given table can have three appearances; (1) minus (-) stand for tool is either not supported or partially supported to the given features and barely eye-catching for any business process description, (2) zero (0) stand for vendor is still do not have effective tactic to support given features, and (3) plus (+) stand for tool is effective to support given features.
From Table 6, evaluation outcome shows that all tools have a greater provision in terms of established criteria. The results from above table based on functional areas and basically referred with respect to the future outlook of any BPMN 2.0 software towards BPM concept (see Table 7). But ARIS business suits have a much-advanced platform by introducing digital technologies earlier into process modeling that supports functionality like process discovery and process visualization functionality, handling change request, process models sharing, cloud-based support, different process analysis reporting, an ease of managing process workflow across the organization. MS Visio tool seems to be developed only for diagramming purpose that supports BPMN 2.0 standard but no other functionalities form given criteria. However, tools like Signavio, Camunda, and Adonis, Bizagi, MS Visio and almost all other business suits from the market have the capability to address this functionality completely in future time.
From the primary evaluation result, we can conclude that process modeling tool that supports BPMN 2.0 standard should have the capability to address further process improvement measures. From an organizational point of view, both functional and non-functional requirements are needed to fulfill as it addresses usability like UI friendliness and performance characteristics . So we will further narrow down our approach by considering end users usability perspective. Defining usability perspective with respect to end users must need to achieve specified objective of process description and process improvement goals efficiently and effectively .
From Table 8 result it’s now clear that ARIS Business IT Transformation Suite and Software AG’s Signavio Business Transformation Suite have the highest degree of provision for BPMN 2.0 process modeling standard in terms of all above-defined criteria for usability and further process improvement functionalities. Applied second evaluation result shows ARIS has some restrictions in terms of import/export functionality, user interface and stability for learning. The reason behind such restrictions is because of their initial focus towards entity-relationship modeling, diagrams decomposition, organization charts and later they focused towards process modeling based on the concept of Event controlled process chains (EPC) . On the other hand, Signavio has a much-simplified user interface and capability to import other vendors supported file formats easily and to support many different formats like HTML, XML, BPMN, DMN etc. With multilingual functionality, contents are possible to show in a variety of supported languages. Separate modeling conventions notation functionality allows any organization to create own templates for process modeling. Process model versioning for release management and different variant comparison gives organization well insight into process distinction. With well-supported collaboration feature, users can easily share process models on the web-based portal to get any comments and feedbacks on models. Like ARIS, Signavio also has the capability to address integration possibility with SAP enterprise tools. Signavio tool itself is very intuitive to learn from available documents to get an overall understanding of the working environment.
In conclusion, of course, Software AG’s ARIS has many capabilities on a larger scale by introducing various advanced digital platform with respect to future needs. However, to initiate from limited scope like process modeling and improvement at the departmental level, Signavio shows the best candidature towards intuitive working, organizations requirements and user satisfaction.
Visualizing business process into flowchart is not new for any organization. Many business people and business analyst considered it as an easy measure to define business processes and to study the way business work. In the beginning, a lot of efforts being put forth to develop web service based XML execution language for BPM system. The idea behind developing such a WS-BPEL (Web Service Based Process Execution Language) is to manage the complex nature of both internal and B2B interaction through web services without any human interaction. This leads to a technical gap between the initial format of business process model like flowchart and format of the executable process model such as WSBPEL. To bridge this technical gap, BPMN is developed as a dual standard i.e. to visualize business processes in graphical notation format (like a flow chart) that also supports for BPM execution language (like WSBPEL).
Organizations are using business process modeling technique like BPMN 2.0 to get a clear understanding of their business processes and to manage the flow of information among a variety of stakeholders. BPMN 2.0 scope is not only limited to certain process but it allows creating end-to-end business process description. The structural elements of BPMN 2.0 are important for any user to differentiate their BPMN diagrams types. There are basically three possibilities to draw BPMN 2.0 process models:
Out of above three mentioned process models, two process models i.e. Orchestration and Collaboration are widely used in any business practice. In Choreography diagram behavior among interacting participants can be modeled but it does not exist within a well-formed context. Choreography diagram doesn’t support by any central mechanism and hence, no shared data available for all elements of the diagram.
Orchestration type is considered as standard process type as it typically indicates a single coordinating point of view and covers both private (internal processes within the organization) and public (interaction among private business process and another processor participant) business processes. Private processes (see Figure 13) within an organization can be executable and non-executable. Executable process types are widely used to execute process models as per predefined semantics, while non-executable models majorly used for documentation purpose i.e. defining process behavior at the defined level of detail by the modeler.
Public processes as mentioned above signify interaction among private business process and another processor participant. The idea of representing the public process
in an organization is to give share business processes with a particular external participant with a limited view of the private process i.e. to protect know-how of an organization while sharing information (see Figure 14 ).
Collaboration diagram type used to show the interaction between to two or different business processes and each participant in the process is represented by its role or responsibility. It has the capability to cover both private and public business processes and used in business practice most frequently because of its expressive nature and information flowability (see Figure 15).
Use of the basic elements in BPMN 2.0 modeling allows creating the simple and understandable structure of the business process, while at the same time complexity of the business process is handled by the complete set of BPMN 2.0 element. These two different notation categories are established so that process designer or reader of a BPMN 2.0 diagram can easily comprehend the basic types of elements and understand diagram without any extensive training. The basic sets of elements are divided into five categories (see Figure 16).
Flow objects are the main supporting elements for any process diagram that signifies behavior of the business process, and they include; Activities and Gateways and Events.
Activity or task element is an important component of process modeling because it signifies a point where work is performed within a business process. The activity could be ‘Task’, ‘Sub-Process’, ‘Transactions’ or ‘Call Activity’ (see Table 9), which allow reusing tasks or processes in the diagrams. In the activities, both sequence flows and message flows are responded while entering and exit.
In process modeling, gateways are considered as a decision point to control the sequence flow of a process. It shows token arrival mechanism, where sequence flow merges at the input and/or splits at apart on output. Like activities, gateways also have varieties of different types, and those can be differentiated by control behavior of gateway. A gateway is visualized by diamond shape symbol with single thin line and marker inside the gateway indicates the type of behavior control. The gateways are classified into five different types and below Figure 17 show the different gateways by their graphical notation.
Exclusive or XOR gateway is used to make a multi-choice decision and create substitute way in the process flow. However, only one path can be taken into consideration after the decision. In the derived CAD Data generation process shown in Figure 18, CAD Designer required generating derived CAD data. To generate derived data, the decision has to make by designer and decision should be selected from below given option i.e. whether designer required generating data for customer, supplier or MB internal reference. Only one of the three paths can be selected. After selecting an option, the model is checked for completeness and saved to SAP system.
The inclusive gateway, or OR gateway, has a similar structure like exclusive or XOR gateway but the only difference is that the capability of creating a parallel path within the process flow i.e. several sequence flows can be run through after the decision. This means all given conditions are evaluated and at the end, at least one path should be taken to complete the process. In inclusive or OR gateway, it’s quite confusing that how many sequence flows are going through and hence it loses the track of simplicity.
The given Figure 19 shows the same process as in Figure 18 i.e. derived CAD Data generation process. But only change is that instead of XOR gateway, OR gateway is used for sequence flow joints and splits.
However, OR gateway has given options to choose from,
− Generate customer data, generate supplier data, generate MB internal data
− Generate customer data and generate supplier data
− Generate customer data and generate MB internal data
− Generate supplier data and generate MB internal data
− Only generate customer data
− Only generate supplier data
− Only generate MB internal data
From the above possibilities, it is now clear that it’s very beneficial to have all opportunities but a condition to select option is still unclear.
Another useful gateway in BPMN is the parallel or AND gateway and it is used for synchronizing parallel flows within process i.e. to start several tasks in parallel. Through parallel gateway after AND-split, sequence flow follows the parallel path without any condition check and order that means in parallel path any task can be initiated first independent of others. The AND join waits until all activities within the AND-split and AND join have been processed to start the subsequent activity after the AND-join.
Till now we have seen only the example of derived data generation process for the customer but what if the customer also wants data in another system simultaneously. It does not make any sense to model different process for similar activity as both activities serving the same purpose of creating data for the customer in another way. To model those parallel activities altogether, AND gateway is useful during process modeling. The choreographic process in Figure 20 describes the activities for customer-specific data creation process for both model type and new CAD system. Once CAD designer gets requirement request from a customer for specific data, designer retrieves specific design model from SAP system and check those requirements carefully against CAD data exchange guidelines. After a thorough check, the designer starts working with model type and CAD system creation in parallel. Notice that, a parallel gateway initiates a parallel execution of multiple activities, which does not mean they are running concurrently, but only running in parallel. After preparing required data, designer goes for data quality check and saves the model to internal SAP system. Finally, the process ends with sending data to the customer.
Events always describe something that happens i.e. incidence of states relevant for a process during the course of a process is generally characterized by events objects. Events must be classified as catching events that catch the result of the process and throwing events that throw the result of the process flow. Events are pictured by circles with open centers that helpful for differentiating a cause (triggers) or an impact (results). There are three types of events available within BPMN 2.0 specifications; Start, intermediate and end events (see Figure 21).
These Events affect the flow of the Process and usually have a cause or an impact and in general require or allow for a reaction. Start events specify where a process will start or begin. It’s always visualized by a simple circle and it responds only to incoming message flow and outgoing sequence flow. Intermediate events occur between start and end events. It specifies status reached or achieved milestone and change in state handled during the process but not starts or ends the process. End events as per name signify a process will stop or end. In BPMN 2.0 specification, varieties of symbols are available for each event sub-type and used as per requirement during process modeling (see Figure 22).
BPMN 2.0 specifications provided notations for handling the information that produced during the process flow. The information noted here could be either single object in input or output from or stored in the collection of objects as a data store. Notable information presented in the form of any document (like a receipt, bill, invoice, checklist etc.), state of data (like completed, working
, instantiation, deleted, achieved etc.) and/or other objects that updated, used or produced during the process flow. Data objects (see Figure 23) provide added information about what they do during the process flow without any direct influence on sequence flow and/or message flow.
Artifacts are used in process modeling to provide extra information about the business process. Two standardized artifacts used in BPMN 2.0 practice, however organization are free to add as many as extra artifacts as per process necessity. Group and annotation artifact can be used in process modeling for documentation or analysis purpose and addition of extra information for participants respectively.
Many process modelers in the organization use Swimlanes technique to differentiate role and responsibilities within an organization. BPMN 2.0 specification used similar Swimlanes technique (see Figure 24) to represent functional capabilities and responsibilities associated with any process in two fragments. A pool is generally represented participants either internal or external and used to organize a system of lanes that embedded various aspects of a process.
Connecting objects are used in process diagram to create a basic skeletal structure of process information flow. The sequence flow always connects two activities or flow elements with each other and hence represents the sequence order of activities that were performed within a process. A message flow links two participants and symbolizes message communication between them. Exchange of messages can be highlighted between two separate Pools in a Collaboration Diagram. Association objects are used to associate any additional data, text and another artifact with process element.
The description of processes is used to document the operational processes at MAHLE and is a part of process development and process improvement using a standard methodology like BPMN 2.0. It will be considered as a tool for analysis and forms the basis for information flow and exchange between different organizational units. To ensure a uniform presentation of the process and thus for a better understanding of to provide the users, a suitable modeling convention is used for the presentation of processes at MAHLE. From MAHLE perspective, it is important to have uniformed process diagrams in terms of notation size, naming and diagram layout, a maintained a consistent modeling style and thus to increase comprehensibility. In the following sections, we will discuss the modeling approach towards a description of PLM process i.e. Model Type creation process and a general overview of recommended guidelines for describing PLM process.
Different concepts and literature already exist for the framework used for BPMN process modeling. Modeling approach or framework clarifies methodological questions on hierarchy levels, modeling elements, information content, the arrangement of graphical elements and other requirements. Within this chapter, a short overview of already existing concepts is given.
Process-driven modeling approach has been supported by Camunda BPMN framework (caBPMN) and established by the name of company Camunda, which offers a platform for a workflow and decision automation of business processes. The framework serves as a guide for the use of BPMN 2.0 for process description. The concept based on a top-down approach, initially modeling simple strategic processes as a starting point. Modeling will be then extended by functional and technical details. Thus, the framework has divided into two process levels based on a technical and functional aspect of any process (see Figure 25)
Figure 25 Version 1, shows the four-level structure and the entire focus is on the projects where the process required improved IT support. Level 1, strategic process model, describes the basic and result-oriented view of any process. Level 2, operational process model, describes operational details of the activities and considered as a base for further technical detailed modeling. Level 3a, basically used for refining the process model that obtained from level 2 in order to execute it in a process engine. Level 3b and 4b require knowledge about UML diagrams. They are used for the execution of the process without process engine and based on conventional platform, where the logic of process is implemented in a programming language. However, to reduce this complexity, Camunda has developed Version 2 (see Figure 25) with a strong focus on process automation. It is relatively lightweight and requires only a few points explicitly. For example, there is no more detailed description how data is handled in the context of processes.
The ARIS concept is the basis of the ARIS toolset to support business process modeling. A good description of the ARIS understanding is illustrated in Figure 26. By image, it is clear that product or service view is the foundation on which the data function and control view are positioned, and at a top level, organization view is found. The structure of any complex process can be controlled by using these different views. An importance has given to control view, as it connects all other views with each other.
Each view from the above house has subdivided into three further abstraction levels; technical detail level, IT level, and implementation level. This means the process modeling into a different level of details should be facilitated by designated level of view. The benefit of using ARIS framework is its greater clarity in describing complex facts of the process and its systematic approach towards analysis.
From above reference models, we can clearly understand that at the initial level of process description, the structure of the process description should be easily represented and understand by any process participants. Camunda and ARIS have covered all the important aspects from the organizational lookout, however, a subdivision of process into 3-5 levels for less complexity and better overview has been proven in practice. It does not make any sense to make processes too long and too confusing, they must be broken down into sub-processes or sub-processes for greater clarity. When subdividing a process into a hierarchy, the main process gives an overview of the various sub-processes; a more detailed representation of the workflow takes place in the sub-processes. The sub-processes are to be stored together with the main process in a folder that bears the name of the main process. The basic hierarchical structure of the process model is proposed by below-given Figure 27,
The below given BPMN 2.0 model is representing one of the PLM process of MAHLE Behr that creates Model Type with the help of SAP ECTR and CAD system. Model type is a special type of derived data that specifically used for data exchange and/or further subsequent process like simulation. Data exchange with external customers or suppliers via model type is helpful to protect MAHLE Behr know-how specifically.
On the first level of the process diagram, an overview of the business processes and their connections are modeled in value chains. Here the modeling emphasis is formed, goals are entitled and the process map is coordinated technically and strategically. On the one hand, the process map as an overview of technically well-ordered processes. Secondly, a further technical and activity-related structure of the representation of all processes in the context of the product lifecycle.
On the second level of the process diagram, a detailed overview of each main business process use case and their inter-connections is modeled again in value chains.
On the third level of the process diagram, an overview of the actual workflow and technical steps to achieve the goal of the process output is modeled in
process collaboration diagram. Especially this level of process deals with a first actual analysis and its relevant factors. Due to a high level of abstraction, standard modeling convention like BPMN 2.0 is required for suitable expression of workflow and support further process improvement techniques. Activity diagrams, actions, objects, and events are used for this purpose. The process is displayed in Swimlanes and consists of actions only.
The fourth level of process diagram shows the detailed level of process workflow and interaction between the participant and the system in process orchestration diagram. The process covered all main sub-processes with actions, objects, and events without any pool and lane. However, for highlighting communication flow with external stakeholder, participants can use the collapsed pool.
The process landscape should be structured on several levels from the rough into the details, depending upon necessity. Starting from the process landscape that includes all business areas should be able to navigate graphically through multiple levels in the detailed processes. As part of business process management, the process landscape should have minimum three level structures.
Manufacturing Companies like MAHLE operate worldwide and operates with huge number large and complex process network. These processes usually involve different stakeholders from a different department and need to be documented in some standard by creating a business process model. Despite standard methodology like BPMN 2.0, a process model must fulfill company’s high-quality standard and should maintain consistency across process modeling technique to avoid further rework. Essentially, two basic guidelines should be emphasized while creating any process model. The first one, we have already discussed in the last section that deals with process hierarchy approach towards modeling process. The level of detail must correspond to tasks and derived from project objective or experience from the previous modeling. Not necessary to present all the details in one process diagram, however business process model should be divided into different level according to their occurrence and significance.
In addition to the level of details, modeling guidelines (see Figure 28 ) also plays an important role in any project success. Basically, process modeling guidelines referred to the classification of the modeling elements, layout rules, naming convention, and filtering structure of the models. The aim of process modeling should be that business processes, process tasks, and activities are modeled only once, thus avoiding redundancies. Classification of elements specifies the usage of events, gateways, and their attributes for process modeling. The notation expresses the presence of the standard like BPMN 2.0. Layout guidelines specify visual aspects like simple modeling, usage of minimal gateways or routing paths per diagram etc. Naming convention in the form of “Verb-Noun” within modeling that helps to easily describe and identify any activity. Process structure ensures that process models can be easily identified by any process user.
...(download the rest of the essay above)