Descripcion

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-7154.htm

BPMJ 15,5

Business process management (BPM) standards: a survey
Ryan K.L. Ko
Advanced Design and Modelling Laboratory, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

744

Stephen S.G. Lee
School of Mechanical and AerospaceEngineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, and

Eng Wah Lee
Planning and Operations Management Research Group, Agency for Science and Technology, Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology, Singapore
Abstract
Purpose – In the last two decades, a proliferation of business process management (BPM) modeling languages, standards and software systems has given rise to much confusionand obstacles to adoption. Since new BPM languages and notation terminologies were not well defined, duplicate features are common. This paper seeks to make sense of the myriad BPM standards, organising them in a classification framework, and to identify key industry trends. Design/methodology/approach – An extensive literature review is conducted and relevant BPM notations, languages and standardsare referenced against the proposed BPM Standards Classification Framework, which lists each standard’s distinct features, strengths and weaknesses. Findings – The paper is unaware of any classification of BPM languages. An attempt is made to classify BPM languages, standards and notations into four main groups: execution, interchange, graphical, and diagnosis standards. At the present time, there isa lack of established diagnosis standards. It is hoped that such a classification facilitates the meaningful adoption of BPM languages, standards and notations. Practical implications – The paper differentiates BPM standards, thereby resolving common misconceptions; establishes the need for diagnosis standards; identifies the strengths and limitations of current standards; and highlights currentknowledge gaps and future trends. Researchers and practitioners may wish to position their work around this review. Originality/value – Currently, to the best of one’s knowledge, such an overview and such an analysis of BPM standards have not so far been undertaken. Keywords Process management, Standards, Work flow Paper type Literature review

Business Process Management Journal Vol. 15 No. 5, 2009pp. 744-791 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1463-7154 DOI 10.1108/14637150910987937

1. Introduction 1.1 The growth of business process management With intensified globalisation, the effective management of an organisation’s business processes became ever more important. Many factors such as:
The authors wish to thank the Editor and reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions.. . . . . .

the rise in frequency of goods ordered; the need for fast information transfer; quick decision making; the need to adapt to change in demand; more international competitors; and demands for shorter cycle times (Simchi-Levi et al., 2000)

Business process management standards 745

are challenging the profitability and survival of big and small companies. In a bid to deal withthese challenges, information technology (IT) was harnessed to manage business processes (Davenport, 1993; Georgakopoulos et al., 1995). Over the past two decades, previously manual hand-filled forms were increasingly replaced by their “paperless” electronic counterparts. This eventually evolved into what is known as business process management (BPM) today. According to prominent BPM researcher vander Aalst et al. (2003), BPM is defined as “supporting business processes using methods, techniques and software to design, enact, control and analyze operational processes involving humans, organizations, applications, documents and other sources of information” (for more discussions on BPM definitions, see Section 2.2). Software tools supporting the management of such operational processes...