modeling requirements for the management of electronic records

Modeling Requirements for theManagement of Electronic Records

Michele Chinosijoint work with Alberto Trombetta

Universita degli Studi dell’Insubria (Varese – Italy)Dipartimento di Informatica e Comunicazione

michele.chinosi@uninsubria.it

Process.govJune 18-19, 2009, Washington, D.C., USA

Agenda

. Introduction: how are documents managed by the European Union?

. The Italian Documental Workflow Protocol

. Overview on the Italian Electronic Documents Management System

. Some example workflows re-engineered with BPMN and serialized with XPDL

. Concluding remarks and achieved results

2/28

The EU setting

Three main offices:

• Bruxelles (BE) (aka the European Washington)

• Strasbourg (FR)

• Luxembourg (LU)

European Parliament: 12 plenary sessions / year

Each plenary session produces:

• Acts, translated in 22 languages and printed in 785 copies

• 3400 archive chests, each containing 40 Kg.

• 100 three-tiered cupboards

Total amount of 200 tons of paper sheets, 12 times a year!

3/28

EU & the MoReq document

eGovernment priorityhttp://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/

2001: The European Commission published the MoReq document

• Model Requirements for the Management of Electronic Records

• MoReq is addressed to Public Administrations (PA)

2008: MoReq2 – an enhanced version

• Information Technology has changed a lot since 2001

• Change in documents creation, capture, management

• Development of new modeling techniques

4/28

The Italian CNIPA Protocol

The Italian Government acknowledged the EU directive. 2003: National Center of Computer Science in the PA (CNIPA). 2005: Digital Administration Code (IT Law 82/2005)

The CNIPA implemented a Protocol to electronically index and store allPA’s documents

Electronic Records (Documents) Management System

It is the computer infrastructure (hardware, software, network,procedures) used by Public Administrations to handle their documents.

Italian Law

The Protocol is the basic infrastructure upon which the entire PA’smodernization process is founded

5/28

The Adoption of the Protocol

2005: 33% Central PA adopted the Protocol

2006: 42% (+9%), but98% of 160 million documents is still on paper sheet :(

2008: 91% (esteemed),283 million documents/year:41% (117 million) documents are managed electronically2% (5,3 million): email98% (277,7 million): traditional ways60% (172 million) exchanged between administrations

6/28

Motivations

• The Protocol provides only a textual description

• 80% of users are clerks, non-technicians, citizens

• No BP or IT know-how, no procedures propensity, no business skills

• Maybe enjoy handling paper sheets :)

Why should we care about modeling PA’s documental workflows?

• to give all the European citizens an easy access to documents

• to ensure the interoperability between European Offices and Countries

• to reinforce exchanges of good practices

• to provide a more easily usable and more widely readable version of theProtocol

• to employ the most recent BP modeling techniques

• to improve interactive business models

• to let browsing, validation, sharing, simulation, execution, . . .

7/28

Business Process Graphical Modeling

Why should we propose a graphical modeling tecnique?

The “eeeBP” model:

• easy readable

• easy sharing

• easy collaboration

• new capabilities

• widely implemented

• use of tools

• executability

• short training time

8/28

A Brief Overview of the Protocol

Main goals:

• Safety (backup)

• Security

• Privacy

• Availability

• Improve searches

• Environment

• Documental Workflows• input / output• internal / external• formal / informal

• Classification

• Sorting

• Filtering

9/28

The Italian PA – State of the Art

10/28

The Italian PA – What we Aim to Reach

11/28

AOO and the Organizational Models

Each PA can specify 1+ Homogeneous Organizational Area (AOO)

Each AOO can be composed by multiple Protocol Organizational Units(UOP), Referential Organizational Offices (UOR) and Users Offices (UU).

• Distributed Model (1 PA, 2+ AOO)

• Centralized Model (1 PA, 1 AOO, + UOR,UOP,UU)

Each AOO can be internally organized as follows:

• centralized protocol system Only 1 UOP

• mixed protocol system Some UOR work as UOP

• totally de-centralized Every UOR is also a UOP

12/28

Safety, Security, Privacy

Confidential documents should be protectedbut all the others should be accessible

13/28

Classification of Documents

• deals with one unique argument

• pertains to one unique protocol

• AOO name and logo

• AOO address

• UOR telephone and fax

• AOO Italian Tax Codeaka the SSN cultural equivalent

• timestamp and location

• protocol number

• # of attachments

• (digital) signature

Administrative Classification

• Received

• Sent

• Internal or Formal

• External or Informal

Technological Classification

• Analogue

• Digital

14/28

Documental Workflows

Documents can be:

• Received or Sent by the AOO

• Formal (internal) or Informal (external)

Digital Documents Exchange Requirements:

• Integrity

• Non-disclosure

• Non-repudiation

• Certified acknowledgment

• Automated protocol and sortprocesses

• Interconnections inside AOO

• Interoperability between diversesystems and organizations

Nonsense!

“The flows can be described without the help of graphical representation”from the CNIPA Protocol

15/28

Business Process Modeling Notation

16/28

Business Process Modeling Notation

17/28

AOO Input Documental Workflow

18/28

AOO Output Documental Workflow – Centralized

19/28

AOO Output Documental Workflow – Decentralized

20/28

AOO Sorting Documental Workflow

21/28

BPMN: Relationships with Serialization Formats

22/28

XPDL Excerpt of the Input WF<WorkflowProcess Id="Process-001" Name="AOO">

<ProcessHeader/><RedefinableHeader/><ActivitySets>

<ActivitySet Id="sp-01" Name="Produce Receipts" /><ActivitySet Id="sp-02" Name="Sorting and Assigning" />...

</ActivitySets><Activities>

<Activity Id="GW-01" Name="Is target UOP correct?"><Route/><Documentation/><ExtendedAttributes/><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity><Activity Id="task-07" Name="Scan the Document">

<Implementation><Task><TaskUser/></Task></Implementation><Performers/><Documentation/><ExtendedAttributes/><InputSets><InputSet><Input ArtifactId="doc-1"/></InputSet></InputSets><OutputSets><OutputSet><Output ArtifactId="doc-2"/></OutputSet></OutputSets><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity> ... </Activities><Transitions>

<Transition Id="tr-01" From="GW-01" To="sp-03" Name="Yes"><Condition Type="OTHERWISE"/><ExtendedAttributes/><ConnectorGraphicsInfos/>

</Transition><Transition Id="tr-02" From="GW-01" To="GW-02" Name="No">

<Condition Type="CONDITION"><Expression/></Condition><ExtendedAttributes/><ConnectorGraphicsInfos/>

</Transition> ... </Transitions><ExtendedAttributes/>

</WorkflowProcess>23/28

XPDL Excerpt of the Output WF<Pool Id="pool-002" Name="AOO" Process="Process-001" BoundaryVisible="true">

<Lanes><Lane Id="Lane-001" Name="UOR / UOP" ParentPool="pool-002">

<NodeGraphicsInfos/><Documentation /><ExtendedAttributes /></Lane><Lane Id="Lane-002" Name="UOP" ParentPool="pool-002">

<NodeGraphicsInfos/><Documentation /><ExtendedAttributes /></Lane><Lane Id="Lane-003" Name="Mail Office" ParentPool="pool-002">

<NodeGraphicsInfos/><Documentation /><ExtendedAttributes /></Lane>

</Lanes></Pool>...<MessageFlows>

<MessageFlow Id="mf-001" Name="" Source="task-004" Target="pool-001"><ConnectorGraphicsInfos/><ExtendedAttributes />

</MessageFlow><MessageFlow Id="mf-002" Name="" Source="pool-001" Target="ask-005">

<ConnectorGraphicsInfos/><ExtendedAttributes /></MessageFlow>

</MessageFlows>...<Activity Id="gw-005" Name="Fax or Mail?">

<Route GatewayType="OR" /><Documentation /><ExtendedAttributes /><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity>

24/28

XPDL Excerpt of the Sorting WF<Activity Id="ie-001">

<Event><IntermediateEvent Trigger="Link">

<TriggerResultLink/></IntermediateEvent>

</Event><Documentation/><ExtendedAttributes/><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity><Activity Id="task-001" Name="Close the File/Dossier">

<Implementation><Task/></Implementation><Performers/><Documentation/><ExtendedAttributes/><Loop LoopType="MultiInstance">

<LoopMultiInstance LoopCounter="0" MI_Ordering="Parallel"><MI_Condition/>

</LoopMultiInstance></Loop><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity><Activity Id="ie-002">

<Event><IntermediateEvent Trigger="Rule" Target="task-010" IsAttached="true">

<TriggerConditional/></IntermediateEvent>

</Event><Documentation/><ExtendedAttributes/><NodeGraphicsInfos/><IsForCompensationSpecified>false</IsForCompensationSpecified>

</Activity>

25/28

BPMN/XPDL Capabilities & Enhancements

• Design methodology

• ExecutabilityXPDL does, BPMN 1.2 doesn’t: will BPMN 2.0 be executable?

• Roles and Domains definition / control (!)

• Privacy protection mechanism

• Enhanced multilevel browseability with embedded access control

• Native complete syntax (and partly semantics) validation support

26/28

Summary & Further Directions

• What we have talked about:• The state of the art in European and Italian PA• MoReq / Moreq2 / Italian Protocol• The use of graphical tools to model the processes but also their

descriptions (metamodels)• Some diagrams and XML serializations proposals, underlying some

great advantages

• Will BPMN need XPDL, BPEL, . . . support yet?

• We are working on:• Design methodology• Self-validation• Security aspects• Views / browseability• Case studies

• eGovernment, eBusiness and eInclusionEU directives (eEurope first, now iEurope 2010)

27/28

Thank you.

Questions?

28/28