Event element group shows that EPC and Flowchart diagram
provides the easiest graphical notation with just one symbol. However, defining
only states can be possible here. The UML activity diagrams are provided with
start and end element without any intermediate state i.e. no information
carrier in the succession of the process. On the other hand, BPMN 2.0 diagram
provides three notation elements for events i.e. start, intermediate and end
event. All these symbols can be easily visualized and used. Thus, a variety of
states in a process can be described and illustrated.
group shows that the graphical notation for EPC, BPMN 2.0 and UML are the same.
But in case of BPMN 2.0 and EPC, there is a possibility to represent individual
process steps as well as sub-processes or references to other processes. But
the scope is limited to represent sub-process in UML activity diagram and it depends
upon the software vendors who provide notations for modeling.
Gateway group shows that there is
the only difference in the semantic understanding of the gateway elements.
Thus, the EPC cannot subsequently use inclusive (OR) or exclusive (XOR) gateway
due to the state of the event. Otherwise, all modeling methods offer an opportunity
to run a process path exclusively or in parallel. In the case of BPMN 2.0, a
variety of gateway elements is used to govern the workflow of the process. These
elements represent fundamentally different symbols and a distinction is made
based on circumstances of the incoming and/or outgoing workflow for branching
and/or connecting, parallelization and/or synchronization, data conditions and/or
Control, data, and message flow group
shows that EPC and UML offer the possibility to model control, as well as data,
flows except Flow Chart diagram. However, only BPMN 2.0 offers a
well-integrated message flow in addition to controlling flow and data flow in
Link group shows that BPMN 2.0 and UML offer the possibility of a visual
differentiation by Swimlanes. Processes can thus be demonstrated very clearly
within defined company boundaries and responsibility conversions can be easily pictured.
With the EPC, functions can be assigned by a symbol of an organizational unit. To
give a short impression of EPC element in comparison with Swimlanes, each
activity would have to be assigned an organizational unit and quickly creates confusion
among process modeling.
All modeling methods presented here are
able to represent data and/or information. In BPMN 2.0, however, more data is demonstrated
that objects of any kind. In addition to data objects and storage container, text
annotations can be assigned to an activity, which increases the expressiveness.
A software system can only symbolically express into the EPC and BPMN 2.0. The
BPMN 2.0 is more focused towards workflow and information flow of the process
and strongly geared into the modeling of the implementing software system. But
in addition, BPMN 2.0 is enough adept to represent any software systems that involves
any time during process accomplishment.
An evaluation based on four different
viewpoints of any business process and supported modeling elements prove that OMG’s
BPMN 2.0 standard notation is capable of addressing most substantial
characteristics of BPM and it ranked best among the widely used process
modeling methodologies. As shown above, all the modeling methods justify
behavioral perspective criteria for an organization by using different
graphical notations. However, approaching towards methodology selection for any
organization, it becomes clear that BPMN 2.0 has most powerful and expressive notation
for the description of any kind of processes. Describing processes in a
standardized way by using BPMN 2.0 notation allows organizations to cover
business as well as a technical view of any process on the same page1. Business level modeling is used for demonstrating a high level of business
abstraction and technical level modeling is used to complement technical
details on the abstracted business level model2. BPMN 2.0 graphical notation is simple to understand but complexes for
modeling any business process. To work smart and take the advantage of BPMN 2.0
standard, the organization is needed a tool that matching organization requirements,
easy to use for all stakeholders and smarter enough to generate modeling result.
1 Allweyer 2016
2 Briol 2013