Skip to main content

Domain Specific Process Modelling in Public Administrations – The PICTURE-Approach

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 4656))

Abstract

In this paper a domain specific process modelling method for public administrations is presented. The public sector is facing an increased service level demand from citizens and companies which comes along with reduced financial scope. Higher process efficiency as well as time and cost savings are required to cope with this challenge. However, reorganisation projects in public administrations with established generic process modelling methods could only identify limited reorganisation potential and just led to small local improvements [1]. Therefore, we have created the domain specific modelling approach PICTURE. The PICTURE-method applies the domain vocabulary to efficiently capture the process landscape of a public organisation. Thus, PICTURE creates process transparency and is able to detect holistic reorganisation potentials within the entire administration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Algermissen, L., Delfmann, P., Niehaves, B.: Experiences in Process-oriented Reorganisation through Reference Modelling in Public Administrations - The Case Study Regio@KomM. In: Proc. 13th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2005) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Green, P., Rosemann, M.: Integrated Process Modeling: An Ontological Evaluation. Information Systems 25, 73–87 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Shanks, G., Tansley, E., Weber, R.: Using ontology to validate conceptual models. Communications of the ACM 46, 85–89 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker, J., Kugeler, M., Rosemann, M.: Process Management - A Guide for the Design of Business Processes. Springer, Berlin (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Villa, M.: Process Modelling in the Public Administrations & e-Government Gateways: ICTE-PAN. In: Proc. eGovInterop 2005 Conference (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Janssen, M.: Modeling for Accountability: The Case of the Virtual Business Counter. In: Proc. 11th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2005), pp. 2021–2029 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Object Management Group: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification [Online]. Available http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/05-07-04

  8. Object Management Group: BPMN Final Adopted Specification 1.0 [Online]. Available http://www.bpmn.org/Documents/OMG%20Final%20Adopted%20BPMN%201-0%20Spec%2006-02-01.pdf

  9. Scheer, A.-W.: ARIS - Business Process Modeling, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Seltsikas, P., Palkovits, S.: Process Modeling Notations for eGovernment: an Assessment of Modeling Notations for Identity Management and GUIDE’s Methodology in Practice. In: Proc. eGovInterop’06 Conferce (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fraser, J., Adams, N., Macintosh, A., McKay-Hubbard, A., Lobo, T.P., Pardo, P.F., Martínez, R.C., Vallecillo, J.S.: Knowledge Management Applied to E-government Services: The Use of an Ontology. In: Wimmer, M.A. (ed.) KMGov 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2645, pp. 116–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Takeda, H., Veerkamp, P., Tomiyama, T., Yoshikawa, H.: Modeling Design Process. AI Magazine 11, 37–48 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Song, X., Osterweil, L.J.: Experience with an Approach to Comparing Software Design Methodologies. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20, 364–384 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Avison, D., Lau, F., Myers, M., Nielsen, P.A.: Action Research. Communications of the ACM 42, 94–97 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28, 75–105 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rossi, M., Ramesh, B., Lyytinen, K., Tolvanen, J.-P.: Managing Evolutionary Method Engineering by Method Rationale. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 5, 356–391 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Luoma, J., Kelly, S., Tolvanen, J.-P.: Defining Domain-Specific Modeling Languages - Collected Experiences. In: OOPSLA 2004. Proc. 4th Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Guizzardi, G., Pires, L.F., Sinderen, M.J.v.: On the role of Domain Ontologies in the design of Domain-Specific Visual Modeling Languages. In: Proc. 2nd Workshop on Domain-Specific Visual Languages. OOPSLA 2002. 17th ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications, ACM Press, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Becker, J., Algermissen, L., Falk, T., Pfeiffer, D., Fuchs, P.: Model Based Identification and Measurement of Reorganization Potential in Public Administrations – the PICTURE-Approach. In: PACIS 2006. Proceedings of the 10th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, pp. 860–875 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kashyap, V., Sheth, A.: Semantic and schematic similarities between database objects: a context-based approach. The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB) 5, 276–304 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lawrence, R., Barker, K.: Integrating relational database schemas using a standardized dictionary. In: Proc. 16th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, ACM Press, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Becker, J., Rosemann, M.v., Uthmann, C.: Guidelines of Business Process Modeling. In: van der Aalst, W., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management: Models, Techniques and Empirial Studies, pp. 30–50 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rupprecht, C., Funffinger, M., Knublauch, H., Rose, T.: Capture and Dissemination of Experience about the Construction of Engineering Processes. In: Wangler, B., Bergman, L.D. (eds.) CAiSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1789, pp. 294–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Pfeiffer, D., Gehlert, A.: A framework for comparing conceptual models. In: EMISA 2005. Proc. Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, pp. 108–122 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Becker, J., Czerwonka, M., Pfeiffer, D., Räckers, M.: Decision Making in Public Administrations based on Analysable Process Models. In: Proc. 5th Eastern Europe e|Gov Days (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Maria A. Wimmer Jochen Scholl Åke Grönlund

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Becker, J., Pfeiffer, D., Räckers, M. (2007). Domain Specific Process Modelling in Public Administrations – The PICTURE-Approach. In: Wimmer, M.A., Scholl, J., Grönlund, Å. (eds) Electronic Government. EGOV 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4656. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74444-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74444-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74443-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-74444-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics