Evaluation of Workflow Management Systems - A Meta Model Approach

<body> <table width="100%"> <tr> <td align="center"> This page requires frames. <a href="http://dl.acs.org.au/index.php/ajis/article/viewPDFInterstitial/322/289">Click here</a> for the non-frames version. <p>Non-frames version <a href="http://dl.acs.org.au/index.php/ajis/article/viewPDFInterstitial/322/289">available</a>.</p> </td> </tr> </table> <h1>Evaluation of Workflow Management Systems - A Meta Model Approach</h1> <h2><i>Michael Rosemann, Michael zur Muehlen</i></h2> <h3>Australasian Journal of Information Systems</h3> <h4>Abstract</h4> <div>The automated enactment of processes through the use of workflow management systems enables the outsouring of the<br /> control flow from application systems. By now a large number of systems, that follow different workflow paradigms, are<br /> available. This leads to the problem of selecting the appropriate workflow management system for a given situation. In this<br /> paper we outline the benefits of a meta model approach for the evaluation and comparison of different workflow<br /> management systems. After a general introduction on the topic of meta modeling the meta models of the workflow<br /> management systems WorkParty (Siemens Nixdorf) and FlowMark (IBM) are compared as an example. These productspecific<br /> meta models can be generalized to meta reference models, which helps to specify a workflow methodology.<br /> Exemplary, an organisational reference meta model is presented, which helps users in specifying their requirements for a<br /> workflow management system.</div> </body>