Posted at 12.14.2018
Keywords: uml advantages and disadvantages
The reason to choose UML to make a model one of the other alternatives is its simpleness and ease of use. The composition of the end model obtained using UML is not hard to design. The given case on hospital strategies was simple to understand however when comes to handling the situation with a model, its an completely different story. This is because the given circumstance includes four main issues and each issue should be resolved properly. We recognized the actors use instances, functions and their attributes at the first place. The next step was to interpret the recognized elements into visual units. They are virtually the steps involved in developing the model using UML.
The first constraint to come up was how to handle external actors while using use circumstance diagrams. Next on the priority list was whether to implement the model using swim lanes or normal movement when it came down to activity diagram. With regards to the hospital case, the entity ЇїЅgeneral practitionerЇїЅ that was suppose to be interpreted as function it was somewhat used as a external actor. Similarly the standard swim lanes that have been to be used in accordance with activity diagram protocol were changed by using the alternate normal stream diagram.
The initial work of interpreting the given problem into workable modeling devices was carried out. It was followed by dividing the complex issue into small modules in order to achieve better efficiency. The model is highly inspired by ЇїЅmodular coding methodologyЇїЅ. That procedure helped us a lot in understanding the complex issue by dividing it into variety of sub-issues and addresses them separately. These collections of smaller alternatives ultimately added up to the consolidated solution.
Reflection on the modeling process: (EPC)
It was an totally different procedure from UML model. As far as we are concern, this model can be an enhancement of a basic flow chart. It is because, the figures, the movement and the composition the model is highly affected by a stream chart. The model required comprehensive research to segregate the model systems from the given case. It takes quite some time to get accustomed to new rules of modeling difficulty develops when we tried out to give a base model for the entire case in order to provide a skeleton approach. Adding to the complexity, the use of logical connectors and splitters was a tedious job.
Modeling the many issues and the key processes posed a number of problem through the early stages. For instance usage of rational splitters and connectors was not the same as using other branching buildings. And also the rules of using units like ЇїЅincidentsЇїЅ, ЇїЅfunctionsЇїЅ and the others was to be retained in memory previous to becoming a member of them with the other systems. The framework of the model was a long one in comparison to that of the previous model. Some portions of the problem given needed to be improved, which in process provided away parts of the literal components.
Adjustments and improvements were carefully personalized in order to meet up with the conditions and guidelines of how the model to be made. The work was to choose units with reference to EPC such as events, functions and organizational devices etc. we recognized happenings from all the center issues that have been to be followed by functions. In an identical fashion the other model systems were sorted out. From then on these individual units were included as based on the guidelines of EPC. The areas in which logical connectors were to be used were determined and the connectors were placed into their place. This ensures proper structure and circulation of process.
Reflection on the modeling Terminology: (UML)
This is because; the given case is simple but a more elaborate one. Thus, a reader could easily identify the number of entities included and their functions but still could improve through the complete model which is an elaborate one without shedding the tabs on the procedure. How and when a reader could get confused with different models depends on the data of the user, that moves as another topic completely. But even an ordinary reader could place the persons, the several processes and the flow of the model readily and easily.
And also the UML diagram itself is quite easy to design that involves few graphical elements. Unlike other modeling dialects, UML emphasizes on ЇїЅuse instancesЇїЅ that are essentially are only notations of the fundamental activities results and the functions which constitutes to the whole process. It can help an individual to easily get accustomed to the protocols of using use situations and apply them. Because the actors and external actors are depicted against the utilization situations, its easy to connect the performers of the action and their sub sequent results. Complexness of producing a appropriate model for business process is reduced to a larger extends.
As far as the hospital case is concerned, UML is the most suitable modeling language to assist the user as well as analyst due to the above said reasons. This case produces four main processes starting from entrance of patient till the release of patient, that involves quite a lot of stars and their functions which produce the given results. One could easily interpret statement into the business model using UML by just using a handful of graphical units without the ambiguities. We say this so because, the four critical issues are resolved with the precise actions being moved into particular use circumstances one after the other in a typical UML fashion. Each professional is connected with their activities and the directional connectors reveal the flow of action.
For example: A nurse in this medical center performs the following actions like allotting bed, recording the admission time, performing ward rounds, providing health care and upgrading registers. It really is visible from the above said reasons that the role of nurse involves a number of activities and these activities are supposed to be noted and depicted in business model to ensure complete data foot of the happenings and their functions. Adding to these facts, one needs to know that these actions aren't consecutive and occurred in a sequence ware the activities performed by other stars to arrive between them or preceding them or succeeding them. Only in UML we could connect the precise actions performed by specific celebrities without getting entangled in the collection of various other practical units.
In a nut shell, a reader could understanding the movement of different celebrities and their functions at exactly the same time in a single diagram.
The only substantive disadvantage of UML is not able to implement logical movement and branching options i. e. in the given hospital circumstance, there are instances were two parallel situations happen where one cannot use UML modeling to depict the parallel happenings occur For example: A nurse provides medical and standard good care whereas in parallel another nurse prepares the necessary test forms and forwards them to the medical professional. Using UML we interpreted this issue statement in the next manner ЇїЅprovides medical attentionЇїЅ, ЇїЅprepares test formЇїЅ; a reader cannot understand whether both of these processes occurred at the same time or at different cases. So these processes were placed one following the other and connected to a ЇїЅnurseЇїЅ. From the above example we can infer that UML will not help plotting of parallel occasions.
The key factor absent in UML is a lack of logical decision creators and branching functions example in discharging of patient, there exists rational branching condition which must be satisfied, the problem is the individual is usually to be cured of diagnosis or else the entire treatment cycle has to be read. It is not possible used case diagram as these two unique events have to be addressed as different use cases alternatively than branched activities or situations.
Comparison of Dialects:
ЇїЅ Logical cable connections and decisions can't be performed in UML use circumstance models and it could be done in EPC.
ЇїЅ We have faced little troubles while addressing parallel processes in use case diagram.
ЇїЅ Composition and integration could be indicated more efficiently in EPC somewhat than UML.
ЇїЅ Only in UML we could connect the precise activities performed by particular actors without getting entangled to other functional units.
Advantages of UML:
UML is the popular strategy of visualizing and documenting the program systems design. UML provides object oriented design principles and itЇїЅs self-employed of specific programming language. UML is a popular and way of documenting and modelling system.
It ensures group of symbols to symbolize graphically the many components and associations within the machine and UML can be used for business process modelling and requirements modelling, it mainly uses to aid object focused system analysis also to develop the object models. Real-time UML, this approach is the application of UML to create the real-time system. It emphasises the machine with structural and behavioural dialect models and the ones designing modelling include the architectural mechanised and comprehensive design. Object focused methodologies have employed in the building of the real time system.
The introduction of IT for hospital case is likely to be a major issue in re-designing the procedures. Therefore, some of the functions will be speeded by producing ideal software and hardware artifacts. To do so, the business models should be seamlessly matched to software engineering models. As a typical, UML seems to be currently the best choice for expressing such models
Disadvantages of UML:
UML has still no structure and specs for modeling customer interfaces. From our point view, the primary disadvantage of this model is lack of formality. UML is used in a implementation process and we wish to make use of it for our level of the process for persistence and also to protect the user translating work into a ground breaking vocabulary. The other related reason is merely that if users are familiar with UML it can be worth keeping it, as a ЇїЅleading endЇїЅ to a formal terms.
Advantages of EPC:
One of the key benefits of the EPC is that it's both powerful and easily understandable for end-users. EPCs are often used for taking and talking about business processes with individuals who have never been been trained in any type of modelling approach. Although EPCs can be comprehended even by untrained staff, the same models can be refined and used for certain requirements classification of an information system. That is one of the reason why that both many end-user companies and many software sellers are using EPCs for business process modelling. The existing associations with traditional modelling methods (e. g. data models, such as the entity romance- model) have been very helpful for growing information systems for process-oriented organizations. Therefore many users have called for a similar kind of interconnection between EPCs and UML diagrams.
Comparison of process:
? UML is richer of concept than ARIS as a result of presence of Stereotype, which enables a higher view of modelling for specific cases.
? ARIS allows personalisation of the model as you concept is displayed in many icons. The software system also allows integration of business and IS concepts.
? EPC method and UML have different scopes of business modelling. There is a need to work with one language in both software and business domains.
? Logical associations and decisions can't be performed in UML use case models and maybe it's done in EPC.
? We've faced little difficulties while addressing parallel processes used case diagram.
? Structure and integration could be portrayed more proficiently in EPC rather than UML.
? Only in UML we're able to connect the specific activities performed by distinctive celebrities without getting entangled to other useful units.
Reasons for choosing EPC:
ЇїЅ The EPCs meet up with the requirements to place forward with regards to the simple understanding by non-specialist in modelling.
ЇїЅ EPCs may offer a multi-level view of the process, since a function in an EPC could be explained in more detail through another EPC.
ЇїЅ EPCs provide a consistent, formally recognized process oriented words that can ensure simulation of the procedures.
Comparison between EPC and UML:
When looking at the EPC and UML for modelling business procedures, there are some aspects from which we can view the correspondences and differences between both of these methods. The comparisons can be mainly grouped into three aspects:
This aspect covers in which framework the EPC or UML are developed and used. Both diagrams can be used for modelling business techniques, but both have different contexts under which they are developed.
In modelling business techniques, it's possible that the EPC or UML diagrams that are manufactured would be ambiguous. Types of this are implicit decisions, probability of having blocking, etc. It is therefore necessary to look into the exactness or ambiguity of the diagrams designed with EPC or UML Activity Diagram.
Both the EPC and UML activity diagrams have similar principles ЇїЅ such as fork/be a part of, branch/merge, atomic/lengthened activity, etc ЇїЅ nonetheless they are represented using different notation and terminology. Some notation doesn't have a counterpart in the other diagram. This means that the semantic differences between them. Therefore we will compare both notations and terminologies to start to see the correspondence of symbols of 1 diagram in another diagram and the differences between them.
Even though the EPC and UML Diagrams are used or may be used to denote business procedures, they were developed in several contexts. This pragmatic difference originates from the different modelling techniques that drive the EPC and UML. A couple of two methods to model something.
In process-oriented modelling, the main concentrate of modelling a system is the process inside the machine. A process contains sequences of events triggering activities. The events themselves are the results of other functions aside from initial occasions that trigger the complete process. By adding logical providers, this event-driven control composition can be expanded to a sophisticated control circulation illustrating relevant decisions and potential for concurrency that happen in the process. This process-oriented modelling is the foundation for the EPC, which found its way as a typical for modelling business functions of an organization. The essential EPC model can be lengthened by further semantic components to illustrate the elements participating in the procedure such as information objects and organization items.
In object-oriented modelling, the main concentration of modelling something is the objects inside the machine. Something is a couple of objects that contain relationships among them. These objects speak each other by exchanging communications. An object is a discrete and differentiable entity in a system. Each thing has properties and exchanges communications through procedures. This object-oriented modelling is the foundation for UML, which is mainly found in software development such as business information system. In the beginning activity diagrams are targeted for modelling the dynamics of inside objectЇїЅs actions. Because of its characteristics similar to flowcharts and its own capability to visualize concurrent activities, they can be generalized to model procedures, use case scenarios, workflows and business procedures.
The formal explanation of EPC can be used to review the syntactical correctness of an EPC diagram. Yet, in practice there are still some problems about the exact interpretation of some elements in the EPC. The ambiguities occur from the analysis of how elements in an EPC diagram interact in a movement of process. Those ambiguities are:
Conjunction of start situations:
An ambiguity concerning the modelling of start and end events appear in the EPC. It really is obvious that nodes without input edges will be the start occasions and similarly nodes without result edges are the end events. However the interpretation is remaining to the audience, which combination of start and end happenings he should see as admissible, that is, as seen in reality. The condition becomes apparent when there exists ЇїЅevents from the aspectЇїЅ ЇїЅ meaning start events in the center of the process which includes been started some time before by the first start happenings. These usually signify communication with exterior entity. However this conjunction of start occasions is not explicitly modelled in EPC.
Semantics of logical connectors:
There are three rational connectors in EPC, that is, ЇїЅXORЇїЅ, ЇїЅORЇїЅ, and ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connectors. In section two we've already mentioned how to hook up these logical connectors to occasions and functions in the control circulation. We know that because a meeting can't be used to make decisions, an event cannot be followed by reasonable connectors ЇїЅXORЇїЅ and ЇїЅORЇїЅ. Nevertheless addititionally there is an ambiguity in the semantic of logical connectors, especially in the ЇїЅXORЇїЅ and ЇїЅORЇїЅ connectors. Consider the situation in body 4. 1. Regarding ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connector, the function F1 can only start when both situations E1 and E2 occur. That's clear, the ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connector acts to synchronize by ready until both incidents have occurred. Regarding ЇїЅXORЇїЅ connector, the moving over rule of the ЇїЅexclusive orЇїЅ connector says that if either event E1 or event E2 occurs, the following function F1 can begin. One question develops, what does the rule mean, when both occasions appear one after another, for example E1 occurs first then after some time E2 occurs? Can the function then run double: The very first time after the occurrence of the first event, and the second time following the occurrence of the next event? There are several interpretations for what the modeller desires to express, when he uses this connector:
ЇїЅ When both incidents occur at the same time, they block the following function, or
ЇїЅ Both incidents cannot occur at the same time, or
ЇїЅ When the next function starts, then exactly one of both happenings must have occurred.
For the ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector, the following rule applies: when at least one of the happenings occurs, the next function can begin; when both incidents occur at exactly the same time, the function can only just start once. An identical question arises for the ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector as for the ЇїЅXORЇїЅ one ЇїЅ that is, if the function runs a few times. Again, there are several interpretations when the occurrences take place one after another, but in the case of ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector it is apparent that when both happenings have occurred the function is not blocked.
E1 E2 E1 E2 E1 E2
AND XOR OR
F1 F1 F1
Two events coming to one connector
Deadlocks and Loops:
For simple EPC graphs it is easy to analyze if the graphs work or not, but for complex graphs we need a tool to investigate them. It's possible that even though the graph is semantically accurate in line with the explanation of EPC, still an research shows there may be deadlocks when executing the process in line with the diagram. A deadlock means that the truth is when the beginning events appear ЇїЅ thus the process runs ЇїЅ over time the process is stuck somewhere in the graph struggling to reach the finish states. Possible causes of deadlocks are mismatches of reasonable connectors ЇїЅ especially in intricate graphs where connectors connect to other connectors ЇїЅ and different interpretation of rational connectors. For a good example an ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector can work either in ЇїЅXORЇїЅ method or in ЇїЅANDЇїЅ function. If an beginning ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector works in ЇїЅЇїЅXORЇїЅ setting but the final ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector works in ЇїЅANDЇїЅ function or the other way around, a deadlock would happen. This can be fixed if the closing ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector ЇїЅis awareЇїЅ in advance in which function the beginning ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector works.
Another possible problem discovered by graph analysis is looping. A loop could cause a process to run forever. This is usually not intended to occur running a business processes.
Since both EPC and UML Activity Diagram serve to visualize operations and workflows, both diagrams have similar notations for a few common terminologies such as activities, branches and merges, forks and joins, etc. as well as some notational dissimilarities between them. These notational correspondences and distinctions will be mentioned here and we will use the result of these notational comparisons for the translation from EPC to UML.
The notational correspondences and dissimilarities of both diagrams can be categorized the following:
Functions and Activity/Action Claims:
Both the functions in the EPC and activity/action areas in UML Activity Diagrams will be the effective elements that stand for just what a person of an organization device or an acting professional in a use circumstance diagram do with regards to the process. Therefore it is clear that functions and activity/action claims represent specific business responsibilities inside a company. That means that they discuss the same role within their respective diagrams. A task or a function usually takes some extended time for you to execute.
In the EPC a meeting is a unaggressive element that triggers a function and is because another function. The occurrences can also show the change of status of an object over the process chain. There is absolutely no correspondence of incidents in activity diagrams, even although activity diagrams derive from state diagram, but the states are generally activity areas, while an event is not an activity. Nevertheless if we have a look at the exemplory case of EPC some of the incidents, especially those that are the immediate results of the function, are redundant. For example in the body 4. 2 the result of the function ЇїЅshoot requirementЇїЅ is ЇїЅnecessity capturedЇїЅ meaning the ensuing event is just to show that when the function surface finishes control will pass to the event which in turn triggers another function. Yet, in activity diagram this intermediate consequence is not explicitly declared. This is because the move in activity diagrams means that when an activity point out finishes it generally does not have to wait but instead it will trigger the next activity.
Control movement and Transitions:
Control stream in the EPC corresponds to the transitions in UML Activity Diagram. Control circulation is used in a process-oriented approach to show the procedure chain over time in one event that triggers a business function that in turn brings about another event. Activity diagrams derive from state diagrams where transitions are defined; transitions show the change of states over time. Control circulation and transitions are instantaneous; they are assumed not to take so much time. However in the EPC, between two functions there can be time for the control/token to be maintained in an event.
Logical connectors permit the splitting of control stream in the EPC and transitions in activity diagrams. For the splitting regarding to taking a decision between different option pathways, both diagrams have an identical construct, which is known as branch/merge. The branching and merging of control flows in the EPC is represented using the reasonable ЇїЅXORЇїЅ connector plus the events following it. Precisely the same mechanism in activity diagrams is carried out using your choice diamond symbol and transition labels. Both diagrams also support the notation of parallelism known as fork/sign up for. The forking and taking part the EPC is shown using the logical ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connector while in activity diagrams it is shown using the synchronization pub. Actually a synchronization bar corresponds to an ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connector alongside the incidents before it, just because a synchronization bar waits for everyone transitions to reach. The primary difference between EPC and activity diagrams in the case of logical connectors is the fact that EPC facilitates ЇїЅinclusive orЇїЅ connector while there is no notation in activity diagrams to denote the ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector.
Organization models and Swim lanes:
An organization unit in the EPC is mounted on a function its responsibility for the respective business activity. In the activity diagrams this is achieved by arranging the activities that belong to the same division in a business or activities being done by the same actor in a use circumstance into swim lanes.
Activity diagrams support the notation for iteration which is not available in the EPC.
The comparisons between EPC and activity diagrams are summarized in the next table:
Context Process-oriented modelling Object-oriented modelling
(business oriented) (IT focused)
Exactness/Ambiguity ЇїЅEvent from the aspectЇїЅ, -
deadlocks, loops, logical
Active Aspect Function Activity/Action state
Passive Element Event -
Process string Control movement Transition
Branch/Merge ЇїЅXORЇїЅ connector Decision diamond
Fork/Be a part of ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connector Synchronization bar
ЇїЅInclusive orЇїЅ ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector -
Actor Organization device Swimlane
Iteration - ЇїЅ*ЇїЅ (multiplicity sign)
Summary of contrast between EPC and UML
Translation between EPC and UML Diagram
In translating from EPC to activity diagram and the other way around, we use the results from the assessment between EPC and UML Activity Diagram as already mentioned before. To translate from an EPC diagram to a task diagram, the next guidelines can be utilized.
ЇїЅ Determine the business units mixed up in process chain together with the functions that every of the organization is in charge of. Align the business units into distinct swim lanes within an activity diagram.
ЇїЅ Transform each function into activity/action claims in the experience diagram and put it in the swim lane of the business unit being in charge of it. In the event the function is a intricate hierarchical function (which is also known as an activity), the refined EPC to the specific function can be either drawn as a complex activity point out (and therefore inside the activity state we must specify some activities performed in the experience as well as access and exit actions) or it would be better to get the function in another activity diagram.
ЇїЅ Transform the related logical connectors from the EPC into the related elements in the activity diagram. The branches and merges displayed by ЇїЅXORЇїЅ connectors are transformed into decision diamonds and the forks and joins displayed by ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connectors are altered into synchronization pubs.
ЇїЅ Connect the actions and decision diamonds or synchronization pubs based on the control move in the EPC.
ЇїЅ Add the beginning event(s) and end event(s). It is possible to have multiple start occasions and end occurrences. This can be regarded as multiple start events in the EPC or can also be regarded as several scenarios in one diagram.
However, there are some problems with regard to the translation from an EPC to an activity diagram:
ЇїЅ As is seen from the contrast, not all reasonable connectors for splitting and subscribing to the control can be modelled in a straightforward way. The main problem has been the ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector; there is no corresponding element in activity diagram to represent this rational connector. One solution is expressing this ЇїЅORЇїЅ connection in terms of ЇїЅXORЇїЅ and ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connectors. To show this, we know from the logic theory that for just two factors x and y, the following equation applies:
Using this equation we can translate two alternative paths taken based on an opening and a shutting ЇїЅORЇїЅ connectors in to the following diagram:
F1 F2 F1 F2 F1 F2
The branch/fork solution for the primary or-connector
However if the ЇїЅORЇїЅ connector connects more than two alternative paths the resulting translation in the activity diagram would be very complicated.
ЇїЅ The organizational responsibility for activities is indicated in activity diagrams using swim lanes. However, swim lanes aren't sufficient for modelling advanced and correct organizational relationships. These are important for example for this is of workflows when support through workflow management systems is supposed.
ЇїЅ Another problem regarding translation from EPC to activity diagram relates to the loss of important information contained in incidents and information/resource objects. A number of the happenings are related to the change of point out of your information/resource object. We are able to show this change of objectЇїЅs status as an object with the object flow in an activity diagram, but if there are extensive information/resource objects in an EPC, they would make the diagram very hard to read.
ЇїЅ This is of activity diagrams as talk about machines is quite difficult for making use of activity diagrams in line with the UML classification for business process modelling because actually not absolutely all business functions can be regarded as internal action says, e. g. interaction with outside sections.
A reverse method can also be applied to translate a task diagram into an EPC:
ЇїЅ Transform the activity/action states from the experience diagram into functions in the EPC.
ЇїЅ Transform the matching decision diamonds or synchronization bars into ЇїЅXORЇїЅ or ЇїЅANDЇїЅ connectors.
ЇїЅ Create dummy happenings before and after every function. For self-explanatory incidents as the results of the respective past functions it is simple to complete them. Conditions as changeover labels especially following a branch can be more or less altered into occasions after an ЇїЅXORЇїЅ connector. When there is an object circulation in the experience diagram that can be used as a guide to produce the happenings e. g. the ЇїЅnecessity [captured]ЇїЅ object status can be changed in to the ЇїЅneed capturedЇїЅ event.
ЇїЅ Hook up the elements (situations, functions, and logical connectors) with the control stream according to the transitions in the experience diagram.
ЇїЅ Hook up the functions with the respected organization units transformed from swim lanes using firm unit project.
Again, there's also problems with regard to the causing EPC diagram:
ЇїЅ Since there is certainly formally no information about occasions within an activity diagram, the main problem in translating from a task diagram to the EPC is to set-up the occasions that induce functions and incidents as the results of functions. Object flows and transition brands or guards can be utilized as a mention of create occurrences, but that is not a general solution. The only guaranteed solution is to try to understand the procedure that is modelled with the activity diagram and use the incidents predicated on this site knowledge, but this is not a good one because in that case it would be better to model directly using the EPC.
ЇїЅ Because activity diagrams contain no information about information or material object, the ensuing EPC diagram is not really a complete diagram; instead it includes only the control stream and organization models.
ЇїЅ Since there is no equivalent notation for iteration in the EPC, we need to build a loop with the. An additional effort to control the loop is needed so that it works as in the activity diagram.
The Integration Way: The Object-EPC (oEPC)
This section argues for a method of object-oriented process modelling and represents selected areas of an exemplary way by called the object-oriented EPC (oEPC).
Motivation for Integration
We have previously discussed in the first part of this section the contextual background of EPC and UML diagrams. The EPC is developed in the context of business process modelling and the UML is developed in the context of software development. Nowadays the successful development of business information systems requires an integrated approach which include the smooth design of both the business procedures and information systems development promoting the business procedures. The business techniques are modelled in a process-oriented construction, while on the other hand object-oriented modelling methods are used only on aspects which can be close to software execution, not the business enterprise processes. However both of these domains are moving better along because of several driving forces:
ЇїЅ Object-oriented execution languages such as C++ or Java play an increasingly important role for the introduction of business information systems. To be able to give an overall description of a companyЇїЅs business techniques and its own object-oriented information systems hence, it is necessary to incorporate business process modelling languages with object-oriented modelling ones.
ЇїЅ Object-orientation becomes increasingly more popular not only as a software paradigm, but also as a means of psychologically structuring complex systems. Thus, object-oriented strategies can even be used on the business level for identifying the objects to be handled in a company process and its own relationships.
ЇїЅ With the development of business things as software components which can be set up to information systems in line with the userЇїЅs specific requirements, it's important to provide means for defining what sort of business process is supported by the cooperation of business things.
For these reasons and due to the fact that the translation way between EPC and UML activity diagrams has posed some significant problems, it is sensible to think of a strategy for integrating the advantages and benefits of the EPC and the UML to make a method that cover both areas of business process modelling and object-oriented information system. The goal of the integration way is on the one hand to protect the potential and the end userЇїЅs acceptance of the typical EPC method for business process modelling and on the other hands to integrate the object-oriented methods with the EPC. With this process it is meant to be possible to model all relevant areas of a companyЇїЅs business operations and its object-oriented information system with no need for turning between different modelling paradigms or for translating between different modelling languages.
Within this concept, an enterprise process is thought as the event-driven control and the equivalent conversation of business items in the same diagram. The oEPC differentiates between business process, business thing, the corresponding resources such as business products, information resources and occasions. Business objects can be grouped into classes. Each business subject class has qualities and methods or functions. For modelling business operations, the connections between objects occurs via note exchanges denoted as event-driven control circulation.
The reason behind reengineering the use case diagram is that the admission report is placed in the filing basket when the admission emerges before 3 P. M. speaking theoretically mo memory space in the info base needs to be allocated for both patients accepted before and after 3 pm. One must know that process is one and the same of admitting patients, so it unnecessary that to separate areas or data bases have to be created which in the end adds up more space. Speaking logically, the nurse can certainly update information in the computer and never have to undertake the long process, beginning with sorting out the amount of patients and their related details, looking into the filing container and then finally inserting the admission record in the filing basket. The outcome is one in the same even if she hadnЇїЅt adopted the wearisome process.
The reengineering process contains following steps:
We have sorted out the example where the functional units related to the situation statement are put in both the models. From then on, the conditional branching structure is substituted / removed.
The occasion from where the admission time is registered is reengineered by swapping the original ones with the newly created functional systems in both models. The event or activity of ЇїЅupgrading home elevators the systemЇїЅ is fixed as of this position. This unit encapsulates the whole remodelled logical flow of the process which eventually ends in placing the entrance in the suspension system folder.
Another issue which includes been reengineered is the main procedure for patient care. Where reengineering had occurred is where two individual nurses have to conduct ward rounding and forwarding the patient medical files to the physician respectively.
It is evident that a solo nurse is capable of doing both the activities affectively and by also reducing the number of people included and time used. Elaborating on the step, as solo nurse can carry out ward round, check the patients and acquire their information and prepare them within an orderly manner in order to forwards to the medical doctor.
So the other nurse do not need to await the ward nurse to provide him/her the record that is usually to be readied. So the time used by the nurse who's waiting for the report to arrive can be taken out. Even when two nurses get excited about the process both of these cannot perform parallel as their individual jobs are not mutually exclusive.
This is the part we have reengineered for the above mentioned said reasons. The newly created flow will involve conduction of ward rounds and organizing patient records by the one nurse. Rather than two separate incidents, the two events are sequentially structured.
Reengineered Patient entrance diagram in EPC:
Patient transfer Reengineered Diagram: