List of Figures

Figure 1.1 The spectrum of flexibility 10 Figure 1.2 Processes vs. business requirement 11 Figure 1.3 Service ecosystem and the amount of flexibility 13 Figure 1.4 The research goal 13 Figure 1.5 Traditional approaches vs. Serendip 15 Figure 1.6 Adaptive organisational structure providing required amount of flexibility 16 Figure 2.1 The collaborators of RoSAS business model 22 Figure 3.1 The relationship between BPM theories, standards and systems 30 Figure 3.2 Categories of process modelling approaches 31 Figure 3.3 Complementary existence of BPM and SOA 34 Figure 3.4 The classification scheme for flexibility 35 Figure 3.5 Dominant underpinning adaptation techniques 36 Figure 3.6 An illustration of different techniques used to improve the adaptability 53 Figure 3.7 Towards an adaptive service orchestration 60 Figure 4.1 Process structure and organisational structure 66 Figure 4.2 Meta-model: organisation, contracts, roles and players 68 Figure 4.3 A contract captures the relationship among two roles 68 Figure 4.4 Meta-model: contracts, facts and rules 69 Figure 4.5 Roles and contracts of the RoSAS composite 69 Figure 4.6 Layers of a Serendip orchestration design 72 Figure 4.7 Meta-model: tasks, roles and players 73 Figure 4.8 The loose coupling between tasks 75 Figure 4.9 Complex dependencies among tasks 75 Figure 4.10 Events independent of where they originated and referenced 77 Figure 4.11 Meta-model: events and tasks 77 Figure 4.12 Advantages of loose coupling 78 Figure 4.13 Organisational behaviours are reused across process definitions 82 Figure 4.14 Meta-model: process definitions, behaviour units and tasks 83 Figure 4.15 Boundary for safe modification 85 Figure 4.16 Meta-model: types of constraints 87 Figure 4.17 Process-collaboration linkage in constraint specification 88 Figure 4.18 Variations in separate behaviour units: (A) bTowingSilv and (B) bTowingPlat 90 Figure 4.19 Meta-model: behaviour specialisation 90 Figure 4.20 Process definitions can refer to specialised behaviour units 91 Figure 4.21 Rules of specialisation 93 Figure 4.22 Role players interact via the organisation 94 Figure 4.23 The interaction membrane 95 Figure 4.24 The indirection of indirections assisted by tasks 96 Figure 4.25 Meta-model: tasks, events and interactions 97 Figure 4.26 Tasks associate internal and external interactions 98 Figure 4.27 Formation of the interaction membrane 99 Figure 4.28 Adaptability in the organisation 101 Figure 4.29 Meta-model: the organiser 102 Figure 4.30 Organiser player 102 Figure 4.31 Reducing a complex orchestration into manageable suborchestrations 103 Figure 4.32 A hierarchy of service compositions 104 Figure 4.33 Implementation of task execution is unknown to core orchestration 105 Figure 4.34 Service relationships versus SLA 106 Figure 4.35 Contracts support explicit representation of service relationships 107 Figure 4.36 Serendip meta-model 108 Figure 5.1 Core components of serendip runtime 111 Figure 5.2 The life cycle of a serendip process instance 113 Figure 5.3 Process execution stage 115 Figure 5.4 The event cloud 116 Figure 5.5 Message interpretation 120 Figure 5.6 Data synthesis and synchronisation design 121 Figure 5.7 Generating process graphs from declarative behaviour units 124 Figure 5.8 An atomic EPC graph 126 Figure 5.9 Mapping identical events 128 Figure 5.10 Predecessor and successor processing for merging events 128 Figure 5.11 A linked graph 131 Figure 5.12 A dynamically constructed EPC graph for pdSilv process 133 Figure 6.1 (A) Process life cycle and (B) BPM life cycle 137 Figure 6.2 Process adaptation phases 138 Figure 6.3 Separation of management and functional systems 141 Figure 6.4 Types of operations in organiser interface 143 Figure...