1.
Modeling Requirements for the
Management of Electronic Records
Michele Chinosi
joint work with Alberto Trombetta
Universit` degli Studi dell’Insubria (Varese – Italy)
a
Dipartimento di Informatica e Comunicazione
michele.chinosi@uninsubria.it
Process.gov
June 18-19, 2009, Washington, D.C., USA

2.
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

3.
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

4.
EU & the MoReq document
eGovernment priority
http://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

5.
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 all
PA’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’s
modernization process is founded
5/28

6.
The Adoption of the Protocol
2005: 33% Central PA adopted the Protocol
2006: 42% (+9%), but
98% of 160 million documents is still on paper sheet :(
2008: 91% (esteemed),
283 million documents/year:
41% (117 million) documents are managed electronically
2% (5,3 million): email
98% (277,7 million): traditional ways
60% (172 million) exchanged between administrations
6/28

7.
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 the
Protocol
• to employ the most recent BP modeling techniques
• to improve interactive business models
• to let browsing, validation, sharing, simulation, execution, . . .
7/28

8.
Business Process Graphical Modeling
Why should we propose a graphical modeling tecnique?
The “eeeBP” model: • new capabilities
• easy readable • widely implemented
• easy sharing • use of tools
• easy collaboration • executability
• short training time
8/28

9.
A Brief Overview of the Protocol
Main goals:
• Safety (backup) • Documental Workflows
• input / output
• Security
• internal / external
• Privacy • formal / informal
• Availability • Classification
• Improve searches • Sorting
• Environment • Filtering
9/28

10.
The Italian PA – State of the Art
10/28

11.
The Italian PA – What we Aim to Reach
11/28

12.
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

13.
Safety, Security, Privacy
Confidential documents should be protected
but all the others should be accessible
13/28

14.
Classification of Documents
• deals with one unique argument
Administrative Classification
• pertains to one unique protocol
• Received
• AOO name and logo
• Sent
• AOO address
• Internal or Formal
• UOR telephone and fax
• External or Informal
• AOO Italian Tax Code
aka the SSN cultural equivalent
• timestamp and location Technological Classification
• protocol number • Analogue
• # of attachments • Digital
• (digital) signature
14/28

15.
Documental Workflows
Documents can be:
• Received or Sent by the AOO
• Formal (internal) or Informal (external)
Digital Documents Exchange Requirements:
• Integrity • Automated protocol and sort
processes
• Non-disclosure
• Interconnections inside AOO
• Non-repudiation
• Interoperability between diverse
• Certified acknowledgment systems and organizations
Nonsense!
“The flows can be described without the help of graphical representation”
from the CNIPA Protocol
15/28

16.
Business Process Modeling Notation
16/28

17.
Business Process Modeling Notation
17/28

18.
AOO Input Documental Workflow
18/28

19.
AOO Output Documental Workflow – Centralized
19/28

20.
AOO Output Documental Workflow – Decentralized
20/28

21.
AOO Sorting Documental Workflow
21/28

22.
BPMN: Relationships with Serialization Formats
22/28

23.
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

24.
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

25.
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

26.
BPMN/XPDL Capabilities & Enhancements
• Design methodology
• Executability
XPDL 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

27.
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 eInclusion
EU directives (eEurope first, now iEurope 2010)
27/28

28.
Thank you.
Questions?
28/28