Organizations are struggling to choose from or combine the different business process management paradigms offered in today's BPM landscape, such as workflow management, dynamic case management and straight through processing. The field of declarative processes seems to be able to address this challenge by offering a unified approach to business process modeling, providing variable amounts of flow at execution time and different levels of autonomy to the actors based on models using a single formalism. The notion of declarativity in business processes seems to be ill defined and is often treated as a black and white distinction. However, a number of quite different formalisms have been developed that are broadly agreed to be declarative. This paper proposes a number of qualitative characteristics to characterize the declarative nature of process modeling formalisms. The characteristics are evaluated by applying them to a number of relevant process modeling formalisms, both imperative and declarative, and we discuss how these characteristics can be utilized to create business processes that offer activity flows that are known up front where needed, and allow ad hoc approaches to offer experts freedom and to support impediment driven approaches in an STP context.
DOCUMENT
Managing and supporting the collaboration between different actors is key in any organizational context, whether of a hierarchical or a networked nature. In the networked context of ecosystems of service providers and other stakeholders, BPM is faced with different challenges than in a conventional hierarchical model, based on up front consolidation and consensus on the process flows used in collaboration. In networked ecosystems of potential business partners, designing collaboration upfront is not feasible. Coalitions are formed situationally, and sometimes even ad-hoc. This paper presents a number of challenges for conventional BPM in such environments, and explores how declarative process management technology could address them, indicating topics for further research.
MULTIFILE
The main objective of the study is to determine if non-specific physical symptoms (NSPS) in people with self-declared sensitivity to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) can be explained (across subjects) by exposure to RF EMF. Furthermore, we pioneered whether analysis at the individual level or at the group level may lead to different conclusions. By our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal study exploring the data at the individual level. A group of 57 participants was equipped with a measurement set for five consecutive days. The measurement set consisted of a body worn exposimeter measuring the radiofrequency electromagnetic field in twelve frequency bands used for communication, a GPS logger, and an electronic diary giving cues at random intervals within a two to three hour interval. At every cue, a questionnaire on the most important health complaint and nine NSPS had to be filled out. We analysed the (time-lagged) associations between RF-EMF exposure in the included frequency bands and the total number of NSPS and self-rated severity of the most important health complaint. The manifestation of NSPS was studied during two different time lags - 0–1 h, and 1–4 h - after exposure and for different exposure metrics of RF EMF. The exposure was characterised by exposure metrics describing the central tendency and the intermittency of the signal, i.e. the time-weighted average exposure, the time above an exposure level or the rate of change metric. At group level, there was no statistically significant and relevant (fixed effect) association between the measured personal exposure to RF EMF and NSPS. At individual level, after correction for multiple testing and confounding, we found significant within-person associations between WiFi (the self-declared most important source) exposure metrics and the total NSPS score and severity of the most important complaint in one participant. However, it cannot be ruled out that this association is explained by residual confounding due to imperfect control for location or activities. Therefore, the outcomes have to be regarded very prudently. The significant associations were found for the short and the long time lag, but not always concurrently, so both provide complementary information. We also conclude that analyses at the individual level can lead to different findings when compared to an analysis at group level. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.104948 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-bolte-0856134/
MULTIFILE
