BPM – Les 3 Modelling bij BPM Standaarden BAM v22

Waarom modelleren Generiek referentie kader Transparantie Software ontwikkeling (welke language) ISO certificering Verkorten Time-to-market Kosten reductie Simulatie

Welke talen? ERD DFD UML… (activity, sequence, class…enz) Organogram BPEL BPML WSFL ebXML

Een processchema

UML Activity Diagram

Gebruik van de standaarden Client Issue: What vendor strategies will enhance a company's ability to productively deploy assembled applications? Gebruik van de standaarden 20 40 60 80 100 2005 2008 2011 Percent SOAP WSDL WS-Security BPEL WS-R/RM UDDI B2B Protocol Interface Contract Endpoint & Events Definition Process Language Registry Security and Reliability SODA Tipping Point WS-Addressing IT departments’ receptiveness to standards, or the lack of it, is quartered squarely between the question of who else is using a given standard (“everybody,” “everybody I know,” “my biggest customer”) and the question of what tasks that standards solve. Many enterprise architects follow the understandable model of waiting to use a standard until everyone else is using it, which inauspiciously leads to fewer standards but better-marketed, vendor-endorsed ones. Some will also consider the necessity of a task the standard seeks to solve, such as interoperability, secure communication among trusted partners, or transaction integrity. A useful enough standard may be used even without critical mass (leading, of course, to critical mass) because IT life is unimaginable without it. Foundational standards for Web services such as WSDL and SOAP are already used so broadly that they may be relied on to continue to grow. Less certain are the remainder of major standards, although their necessity in the quest to elevate services from call-response to more-sophisticated models makes them appealing. We believe that the universal yearning for more-secure connections will drive WS-Security, and a need for flexibility in communication will elevate WS-Addressing. Problematic but promising are BPEL, UDDI, WS-R (or WS-RM, depending on which wins the ongoing standards "rodeo") and WS-TX. Expect continued challenges for these with the real likelihood of a super boost at the end of the decade as tipping points pass by.

Magic Quadrant 1 (Gartner 2009) Strategic Planning Assumptions: IBM and Microsoft will continue to lead in Web services influence through 2006 (0.8 probability). A business application vendor will be a leader in Web services by 2005 (0.8 probability). Magic Quadrant 1 (Gartner 2009) The Magic Quadrant displays the relative position of major vendors in Web-services-enabled software and their overall impact on the development of Web services in general. A company must have annual revenue of more than $500 million to qualify for inclusion. Criteria evaluated include: Web services vision and importance to overall business strategy Breadth of strategy Web services standards influence (not standards compliance and not B2B semantics standards, such as ebXML) Developer influence Support of emerging business models for Web services Web services are beginning to have increased influence as they move into the mainstream. The influence of Web services exceeds that of traditional developers and integration specialists. As a result, Gartner has added several business application vendors to this Magic Quadrant because their impact on the Web services market will increase.

Magic Quadrant 2 (Gartner 2012)

Standaardisatie en ontwikkeling Strategic Planning Assumption: Through 2009, ensuring interoperability will consume an increasing portion of resources among vendors, end-user organizations and standards bodies (0.8 probability). Standaardisatie en ontwikkeling http://oasis-open.org Start: 1993 Support: 5/5 Gartner Rating: Strong Positive UDDI, BPEL, WS-Reliability WSRP, WS-Security, SAML, WSDM other WS*, ebXML, UBL http://w3c.org Start: 1994 XML, SOAP, WSDL WS-Addressing, OWL, RDF Sponsors: BEA, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, HP, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Novell, Nokia, Oracle, SAP, SeeBeyond, Sun, Tibco, WebMethods Client Issue: Which dynamics will affect the development of Web services standards through 2009? The adoption of Web services standards and protocols will increase the capability of companies to deploy high-value Web services that support a range of mission-critical enterprise processes internal and external to the company. Often, when there is a hot technology trend, real-world deployments proceed parallel to (or they predate) standardization. The standards process often suffers from “growing pains” because it must accommodate production-use of proposal variants. By contrast, the basic suite of Web services protocols (SOAP and WSDL at the W3C and UDDI at OASIS) has garnered widespread industry support (more than “lip service” — working code libraries and development tools), while concurrently offering little significant, commercially viable, publicly accessible real-world deployments. There are many nonpilot deployments, but these are primarily within companies and not for external consumption. The introduction of more-advanced Web services standards later in this decade will affect transactional, orchestrated and syndicated Web services through a wide range of independent and standards-bodies-driven efforts. However, efforts coordinated by independent bodies, most notably the W3C and OASIS, offer the greatest chance of widespread adoption and ultimate success. Action Item: Participate in standards development activities at OASIS and W3C where you have a vested interest in the outcome. You don’t have to be a formal member to track discussions, read minutes and listen in on conference calls.

Standaardisatie en ontwikkeling (2)

Grafisch versus tekst

Niveaus van modelleren

Modelleertool als integrator modellen (architectuur)

Visualisatie verschillende modellen in een modelleertool (Testbed)

Bedrijfskundig Framework: SqEME

Zachmann (ICT) Framework

Conventiedocument (randvoorwaarden) Doelstelling procesmanagement Structuur procestool Gebruikersrechten e.d. Procesarchitectuur (z.o.z.) Ontwerpregels en schematechnieken Consistentieregels Document en versiebeheer Organisatie en communicatie

Aspecten procesarchitectuur Welke informatie leggen we vast (vastleggingsaspecten) Hoeveel proces lagen Welke modellen Welke objecten Hoe verwijzen de processen naar elkaar Hoe verwijzen modellen naar elkaar

Vastleggingsaspecten van processen Wat (procesgang) Waarom (doel/toegevoegde waarde) Voor wie (output bestemd voor…) Waarmee (enterprise resources ¬human) Wie (human resources) Wanneer (triggers (plan- of klantgestuurd) en eindstatus)

Koppeling Proces design - BAM

Monitoring cockpit

Business Intelligence of Business Process Intelligence ???? Data Warehouses Data Mining OLAP En hoe gaat het dan met een ESB?