International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security

국제컴퓨터통신보호논문지학회 (International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Beyond SDLC: Process Modeling and Documentation Using Thinging Machines

  • 투고 : 2021.07.05
  • 발행 : 2021.07.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The software development life cycle (SDLC) is a procedure used to develop a software system that meets both the customer's needs and real-world requirements. The first phase of the SDLC involves creating a conceptual model that represents the involved domain in reality. In requirements engineering, building such a model is considered a bridge to the design and construction phases. However, this type of model can also serve as a basic model for identifying business processes and how these processes are interconnected to achieve the final result. This paper focuses on process modeling in organizations, per se, beyond its application in the SDLC when an organization needs further documentation to meet its growth needs and address regular changes over time. The resultant process documentation is created alongside the daily operations of the business process. The model provides visualization and documentation of processes to assist in defining work patterns, avoiding redundancy, or even designing new processes. In this paper, a proposed diagrammatic representation models each process using one diagram comprising five actions and two types of relations to build three levels of depiction. These levels consist of a static description, events, and the behavior of the modeled process. The viability of a thinging machine is demonstrated by re-modeling some examples from the literature.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Schumann, R., Serge, D., Taramarcaz, C., Florian, E.: Effective business process documentation in federal structures. In: Proceedings of Informatik 2014 (Workshop BPM im Offentlichen Sektor), Lecture Notes in Informatics, P-232, pp. 1043-1058 (September 2014)
  2. Keen, R.: 7.5.3 control of documented information explained [with procedure], ISO CHECKLIST. (February 2021). https://www.iso-9001-checklist.co.uk/7.5.3-control-of-documented-information-explained.htm
  3. Fleischmann, A. Oppl, S., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: Realization. In: Contextual Process Digitalization, Cham, pp. 223-252 (March 2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38300-8_7
  4. Martin, S. F., Wagner, H., Beimborn, D.: Process documentation, operational alignment, and flexibility in IT outsourcing relationships: A knowledge-based perspective. In: ICIS 2008 Proceedings, paper 75. http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2008/75
  5. Chaffee, J. R.: Read this if you think process documentation is futile. Medium (September 2020). https://medium.com/chapters-interludes/read-this-if-you-think-process-documentation-is-futile-9acfabc6155e
  6. Al-Fedaghi, S., Alahmad, H.: Process description, behavior, and control. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, vol. 15(7), pp. 124-133 (July 2017)
  7. Modhaffar, M.: Conceptual modeling of an organization: Case study of vessel berthing and cargo oil filling. MS thesis, Computer Engineering Department, Kuwait University (August 2021)
  8. Schenker, F., Reitzig, R. W.: Strategies for process documentation-Part 1. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2009 NDIA Conference (November 2009)
  9. Kaufling, J.: Process documentation and automation. DatAvail (May 2017). https://www.datavail.com/blog/process-documentation-andautomation/
  10. Graham, C.: Fear of the unknown with healthcare IoT devices: An exploratory study. Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective, vol. 30, Issue 2, pp. 100-110, Aug., 2020 DOI: 10.1080/19393555.2020.1810369
  11. Six Sigma Institute: Six Sigma DMAIC process-Define phase-Process mapping/Flow charting, site. (2021). https://www.sixsigmainstitute.org/Six_Sigma_DMAIC_Process_Define_Phase_Process_Mapping_Flow_Charting.php
  12. Beimborn, D., Hirschheim, R., Schlosser, F., Schwarz, A., Weitzel, T.: How to achieve IT business alignment? Investigating the role of business process documentation in US and German banks. In: AMCIS 2008 Proceedings, paper 291 (August 14-17, 2008).
  13. Chow, L., Medley, C., Richardson, C.: BPM and service-oriented architecture teamed together: A pathway to success for an Agile government. In: Fischer, L. (ed.) 007 BPM & Workflow Handbook: Methods, Concepts, Case Studies and Standards, in Business Process Management and Workflow, Workflow Management Coalition, pp. 33-54 (2007)
  14. Heidegger, M.: The thing. In: Poetry, Language, Thought, A. Hofstadter, Trans. Harper & Row, New York, pp. 161-184 (1975)
  15. Al-Fedaghi, S.: Classes in Object-Oriented Modeling (UML): Further Understanding and Abstraction. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS), vol. 21(5), pp. 139-150 (2021). https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2021.21.5.21
  16. Rabova, I.: Using UML and Petri nets for visualization of business document flow. Acta Univ. Agric. et Silvic. Mendel. Brun., vol. LX(2), pp. 299-306 (2012)
  17. Meroni, G., Plebani, P.: Combining artifact-driven monitoring with blockchain: Analysis and solutions. In: Matulevicius, R., Dijkman, R. (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops. CAiSE 2018, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 316, pp. 103-114. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92898-2_8
  18. He, L., Cheng, Y., Su, X.: Research on the sustainability of the enterprise business ecosystem from the perspective of boundary: The China case. Sustainability, vol. 12(16), p. 6435, DOI: 10.3390/su12166435
  19. Ivanchikj, A., Serbout, S., Pautass, C.: From text to visual BPMN process models: Design and evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 229-239 (October 2020). DOI: 10.1145/3365438.3410990
  20. Saarsen, T., Dumas, M.: The process documentation cube: A model for process documentation assessment. In: La Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops, BPM 2012, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 132, Springer, Berlin (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36285-9_51
  21. Al-Fedaghi, S.: UML Modeling to TM Modeling and Back. IJCSNS, vol. 21(1), pp. 84-96 (2021). https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2021.21.1.13
  22. Al-Fedaghi, S.: Advancing Behavior Engineering: Toward Integrated Events Modeling. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS), vol. 20(12), pp. 95-107 (2020). https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2020.20.12.10
  23. Wand, Y., Woo, C., Wand, O.: Role and Request Based Conceptual Modeling: A Methodology and a CASE Tool. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olive, A. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling - ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 540-541. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2008)
  24. Bennedsen, J., Caspersen, M. E., Kolling, M.: Reflections on the Teaching of Programming. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2008)
  25. Pedroni, M., Meyer, B.: Object-Oriented Modeling of Object-Oriented Concepts: A Case Study in Structuring an Educational Domain. In: Proceedings of Teaching Fundamental Concepts of Informatics, 4th International Conference on Informatics in Secondary Schools - Evolution and Perspectives, ISSEP 2010, Zurich, Switzerland, January 13-15, 2010. LNCS, vol. 5941, pp. 155-169. Springer (2010)
  26. Sedrakyan, G., Poelmans, S., Snoeckc, M.: Assessing the Influence of Feedback-Inclusive Rapid Prototyping on Understanding the Semantics of Parallel UML Statecharts by Novice Modellers. Information and Software Technology, vol. 82, pp. 159-172 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.11.001
  27. Nikiforova, O., Sejans, J., Cernickins, A.: Role of UML Class Diagram in Object-Oriented Software Development. Applied Computer Systems, vol. 44, pp. 65-74 (2011)
  28. Miles, R., Hamilton, K.: Learning UML 2.0, 1st Edition. O'Reilly Media, Sebastopol, California (2006)
  29. Aguirre-Urreta, M. I., Marakas, G. M.: The Empirical Literature Comparing Entity Relationship and Object-Oriented Modeling Techniques, While Vibrant, Has Often Yielded Equivocal Findings. ACM SIGMIS Database, vol. 39(2), pp. 9-32 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1145/1364636.1364640
  30. Houy, C., Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Understanding Understandability of Conceptual Models-What Are We Actually Talking About? In: Atzeni, P., Cheung, D., Ram, S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7532, pp. 64- 77. Berlin, Springer (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642- 34002-4_5
  31. Valaski, J., Reinehr, S., Malucelli, A.: Evaluating the Expressiveness of a Conceptual Model Represented in OntoUML and UML. In: Proc. of the 19th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), vol. 2, pp. 263-270 (2017)