JurPC Web-Dok. 28/2006 - DOI 10.7328/jurpcb/200621225

Grozdana Sijanski, Susanne Münch *

Modelling Legal Proceedings

JurPC Web-Dok. 28/2006, Abs. 1 - 26


As part of the eJustice project, a research project within the EU's 6th Framework Programme(1), an interdisciplinary team from Saarbrücken(2) was engaged in the representation of legal proceedings. Modelling techniques originating from business administration were adapted to the requirements of the legal sector. From this basis, the prototype "Lexecute" was developed. JurPC Web-Dok.
28/2006, Abs. 1
Table of Contents                 [ deutsche Version ]
I. Introduction
II. Business process modelling in the business sector
1. Understanding of the term business process modelling
2. Principles of good modelling
3. Purposes of modelling in the business sector
III. Benefits of modelling in the judicial sector
1. Optimising legal proceedings
2. Increased transparency through modelling
IV. Requirements for modelling in the judicial sector
1. Sources for the modelling
2. Enhancement with attributes specified for the judicial sector
3. Modularisation and hierarchies
4. Cross-border communication
V. Implementation through Lexecute

I. Introduction

Decision makers in the judicial sector have been aware of the role of information technology for a long time now. The hopes are that the use of IT solutions will improve and speed up processes in this sector, too. However, experience from the business sector shows that using IT solutions alone does not improve business processes. Especially in the administrative and service sector, for a long time no positive correlation between IT expenditure and productivity could be established(3). As IT solutions are either already available on the market or can be obtained without major effort, the challenge, rather, is to find out what IT use will mean for the general process structure in terms of potential and impact(4). But this requires, first of all, a critical examination and analysis of the organisational processes(5). For this purpose, processes, for example those executed when services are provided(6), may be represented as models. This article examines the issue whether business process modelling, which has proved successful in the business sector, can also be of importance for the judicial sector, and which special features must be taken into account. Abs. 2

II. Business process modelling in the business sector

1. Understanding of the term business process modelling

Business informatics understands a (business) process as a closely linked, self-contained and logical sequence of functions or activities concerned with the provision of a service(7). Abs. 3
Models are abstract images of reality(8) representing only the part of the real world that is of special interest and they may be designed with different abstraction levels(9). Business modelling aims to reduce the complexity of the "system" enterprise through abstraction(10). Different methods are available for designing process models, prescribing a methodical and logical procedure and approach to modelling. The arrangement of the model and the type of its construct in each case are prescribed by the syntax and semantics of the modelling method used(11). Apart from the Petri net method(12) as an object-oriented modelling approach, particular emphasis must be given to the so-called event driven process chain (EPC) as a business process modelling method. Scheer describes a business process as a sequence of events and functions in which an event is always the trigger for a function(13). EPC as a graphic model visualises how within a business events can initiate certain functions, which then in turn cause further events; amongst other things, single functions can have the respective organisational units performing it (task owners) and the data to be processed assigned to it(14). Abs. 4
Because of the ambiguity of natural language, the difficulty in comprehending all of the represented facts and possible contradictions, verbal descriptions are seen as of only limited use for the specification of information systems(15). This is exactly where modelling methods provide an opportunity to describe the problems in organisational processes in a semi-formal manner, thus creating the basis for further, formal implementation into computer-aided information systems(16). In the areas of decision making and planning, business administration certainly also makes use of the more exact and verifiable "mathematical language". Nevertheless, business administration predominantly uses natural language. Here, business process modelling is understood as a helpful "extension of language"(17). Abs. 5

2. Principles of good modelling

In order that models can be understood in their context by third parties, modelling must observe some principles, which accompany and support the whole modelling process as fundamental rules(18). A model is accurate, for instance, when it is correct in syntax (complete and consistent) and semantics (predictable structure and behaviour)(19). In accordance with the requirement of relevance, only those sections of the real world which fit the purpose of the modelling are to be represented, i.e. the model should contain neither less nor more information than necessary. Consequently, the question to be asked is which processes are relevant to the modelling, and to which extent, as well as which degree of detail the model must provide(20). In addition, the model must be unambiguous to its target group, comprehensible by itself and clear. Clarity of a model is predetermined, amongst other things, by graphic structuring and arrangement of the information objects and, in particular, by the comprehensiveness of the model and the degree of complexity(21). Breaking down the model into partial views(22) is likely to provide easier access to the diverse items of information combined in the model(23). Models created with different views, e.g. data models or organisation models, have to be capable of integration, thus facilitating a meta-model with a general view(24). Finally, a model must also satisfy the principle of comparability(25). This is only fulfilled if objects are named according to conventions and the same model constructs and equivalent degrees of detail are used during the creation of the model. As models designed with different methods must be compatible, the meta-models forming the basis of the methods must also be integrated(26). Depending on the objectives of the modelling, the individual modelling principles have a different meaning. Moreover, the principles have diverse reciprocal relationships with each other. Abs. 6

3. Purposes of modelling in the business sector

First and foremost, models should foster better understanding of company structures and company processes(27). In the business sector, modelling of business processes offers a wealth of potential uses. Thus, for instance, a distinction can be made between the descriptive, analytic, simulating and implementing purpose of a model(28). Whilst the implementing purpose addresses the implementation business processes, the descriptive purpose has improved transparency and communication in respect of complex processes as its objective. The analytic and simulation purposes(29) of a model, however, aim at maximum optimisation of business procedures; based on an analysis of the model of the present process and the associated identification of weak points, an ideal model of the optimised business process can be produced. Abs. 7

III. Benefits of modelling in the judicial sector

When analysing the potential benefits of modelling in the judicial sector, consideration must be given to the different objectives of business and the judicial sector. The mission of an enterprise is the production and utilisation of goods and services by combining factors of production(30). Maximising profits whilst expending minimum resources is the crucial objective here. In comparison, the objective of the legal system may approximately be described as establishing law and order whilst protecting citizens' rights and the public interest as much as possible. This approximate description makes it clear already: the judiciary must meet the requirements of a majority of equally important objectives. Although undoubtedly a distinction can be made between the objectives of business enterprises on the one hand and the legal system on the other hand, modelling methods can still be of great benefit to the legal domain, too. Abs. 8
When examining the potential benefits associated with the modelling of legal proceedings, two aspects take centre stage: an opportunity to optimise legal procedures, and a more transparent representation of judicial workflows through their visualisation. Abs. 9

1. Optimising legal proceedings

It is both in the public interest and in the private interest of individuals that legal proceedings are conducted speedily and with minimum use of resources. Nevertheless, optimising legal proceedings must always take second place to protecting rights. This rule especially limits potential benefits of modelling when the optimisation of work flows is achieved by changing the process structure. This can be illustrated with two examples: Abs. 10
In civil proceedings, the defendant must be given the opportunity to lodge a defence. Undoubtedly, the process could be speeded up if the judge could dispense with this right to a defence in straightforward cases. But this would violate the principle of fair trial. A reorganisation of the process structure would only be possible if the rights of the individual were protected at the same time. This severely restricts the opportunities for optimising legal proceedings. Similar concerns apply when the structure of operations is optimised by changing individual task owners' functions within the organisation. In terms of effectiveness, it would be sensible to keep the schedule of responsibilities flexible, in order to ensure that the judges' workloads are as evenly distributed as possible and that resources are utilized as effectively as possible. But such an approach violates the principle of the lawful judge (Art. 101 para 1 sentence 2 German Basic Law; Art. 6 ECHR). This requirement of the rule of law takes precedence over more efficient structuring of procedures. Consequently, such a schedule of responsibilities would be unlawful(31). Abs. 11

2. Increased transparency through modelling

When looking at the judicial sector, the disadvantages associated with the use of natural language become particularly obvious. Ambiguity of language and the problem of how to represent facts in full and comprehensibly stand out particularly. Due to the differences in language, legal culture and legal systems, these problems are multiplied in the area of cross-border procedures. With regard to legal proceedings, the descriptive quality of a model alone can be of great use. Abs. 12
In a Europe that is growing ever closer, legal proceedings with cross-border aspects are of increasing importance. European integration confronts especially lawyers with new tasks. Having to find one's way around strange legal orders and procedural rules ranks amongst the biggest challenges. And vice versa, well-functioning cross-border cooperation between the organs of the judicature promotes integration of the European jurisdictions. Improved transparency of legal proceedings can support this cross-border cooperation. Within the context of legal proceedings, a clear representation of institutional functions alone can improve communication between organs of justice and prevent misunderstandings. Abs. 13
At the same time, transparency of legal procedures is one of the basic preconditions for increasing citizens' confidence in the legal system. Non-transparent processes can give citizens the impression of being at the mercy of the legal system and create distrust. A clear, easily accessible, graphic representation is capable of making even complex legal proceedings comprehensible, and at the very least it gives the citizen a general idea of the process. Subject of a "modelling project" could be, for instance, a description of the logical sequence of all the necessary checks in the context of the admissibility of a claim or constitutional complaint. The resulting model would not describe the course of a specific claim or constitutional complaint, but rather abstract the individual facts to picture the general order of events. Abs. 14

IV. Requirements for modelling in the judicial sector

1. Sources for the modelling

How realistic a model is depends primarily on the choice and quality of the sources for the modelling. Process modelling does not address correctness of decision making, but the temporal-logical connection of the individual activities. Statutes and statutory instruments contain the basic structural framework for the processes executed within a judicial authority. All permissible starting and finishing points of a process are determined by statute. In addition, statutes and statutory instruments always determine how the processing of an activity is structured. But these legal rules do not catch all the details of a process. Regulation by statutes and statutory instruments must necessarily leave the courts some scope for organisation, which the courts themselves will use for internal orders and directions. This facilitates a flexible adaptation of the organisational structure to its respective surroundings. Abs. 15
The internal organisational structure of the respective judicial authority is of great importance to the process and its actors. In order to achieve improved cooperation between authorities via models, it is essential that the internal schedules of responsibilities are included in the model. Here, it is possible to create a largely personalised, inter-authority representation. Knowing the respective contact persons for different steps of a complex process alone facilitates a speedier and more efficient execution of the process. In particular, any mistakes can be rectified quicker and without unnecessary delay. Abs. 16
Representation of organisational aspects not found in statutory instruments or statutes is also important for improving the transparency of legal processes. Availability of printed forms and leaflets is only partly regulated by law. Integrating such information into the work flow model can achieve two objectives: the significance of a form for an individual stage of the process can be clarified via a model and the information for each individual stage can be provided in a specified form. Abs. 17
For the reasons demonstrated, modelling with reference to text alone is not possible. Interviews with the actors of the respective processes are therefore essential and must be consulted as a complementary source. In particular, these interviews must include questions about the internal allocation of functions and the chronological order of the individual stages of the process. Abs. 18

2. Enhancement with attributes specified for the judicial sector

Linking a model with the relevant context information is capable of making modelling useful for the judicial sector(32). Through linking the model with the statutory basis, the model can be verified and continually updated in terms of legal aspects. In addition, information essential to users, e.g. costs, forms and deadlines, can be integrated into the model, namely into those stages of the process it is relevant for. From interviews with experts the following items of context information were identified as essential for legal proceedings:

Abs. 19

Attribute

Value

Name

Name of the function, e.g.: "application"

Description

Textual description of the function, e.g.: In order to get a "Vollstreckungsbescheid" (enforcement order), i.e. an executory title, the "Antragsteller" (claimant) has to apply for it explicitly.

Legal Basis

Specifies the legal basis, e.g. §§ 699, 702, 703 II ZPO (German Code of Civil Procedure)

Deadlines

Specifies the start and the end or a period of time for a performance.

Costs

Gives the total costs of a function for the actor (manually, if applicable).

Documents

Specifies the documents which are needed to trigger a function or which are generated by a function, e.g. "Zustellungsnachricht Mahnbescheid" (notice about the service of an order for payment), "Antrag Vollstreckungsbescheid" (application enforcement order) etc.

First Actor

Specifies the organisational unit which triggers the function, e.g. "Antragsteller" (claimant)

Object Path

Specifies the path in the model leading to the concrete function (for orientation purposes), e.g. "Mahnverfahren" (order for payment procedure Germany) \ Procedure "Vollstreckungsbescheid" (enforcement order)

Triggering Process Path

Gives the process path, which triggers the function, e.g. Order for payment procedure (Germany) \ Procedure "Mahnbescheid" (order for payment)

3. Modularisation and hierarchies

Inevitably, a detailed model of a legal procedure is very complex. Because of this complexity, the diverse information contained in a meta-model is not easily accessible to the user. Here, clarity and intelligibility of the model can be improved through use of hierarchies and modules. Abs. 20
Hierarchies differentiate the degree of detail of a function through using different abstraction levels. Thus, users initially only see the higher-level functions. These functions are represented in a more refined fashion on the lower abstraction level. As a principle, any number of abstractions levels may be chosen, to be determined in terms of the requirements of the relevant process(33). However, for clarity's sake, the number of the abstraction levels should not exceed ten. Hierarchic representation as an organisational principle for complex processes is accepted in legal methodology. Superordinate terms for legal hierarchies that have already been created can be employed in modelling (e.g. admissibility and individual preconditions for admissibility of a claim). Abs. 21
Another method for improving the clarity of the model and the efficiency of the modelling is the use of modules(34). Modules are self-contained units of a process which appear in numerous legal procedures in the same form. Thus, they are reusable. The statutory regulation of legal proceedings itself also contains modules, e.g. service of documents, swearing in or examination of witnesses. These can be adopted in modelling. Apart from the modules provided by law, there are module-like activities which occur in numerous processes. Amongst them, for example, is the sending of a document. Once defined, the modules can be used again in all parts of the procedures where the respective process or activity recurs. Abs. 22

4. Cross-border communication

When representing cross-border processes, inevitably there will be a problem with language. Although modelling methods, like EPCs, are based on a graphic representation of a process, natural language plays a central part. To facilitate the use of modelling at a trans-national level, language barriers must be overcome. A translation of the model which extends to the legal terminology should be rejected as a possible solution. In the area of law, often there is no adequate translation of the respective specialist term if the legal institution at issue is unknown to a different legal culture. Therefore, specialist legal terms should be left in the language of the country of origin of the procedure. The user may be provided with an approximate translation by means of a multilingual glossary. Abs. 23

V. Implementation through Lexecute

On the basis of the concept developed, Lexecute was designed. This prototype can be accessed under http://rechtsinformatik.jura.uni-sb.de/ejustice/lexecute/ and is compatible with all common browsers. Lexecute is a tool which assists users in finding their way around a legal procedure by handing them the necessary legal and operational-structural information. Thus, drawing on the German "order for payment procedure" as an example, methods of business process modelling were employed to develop a new kind of representation of legal proceedings. In essence, this is a model enhanced with diverse information, which, amongst other things, calls up relevant statutory provisions in their original version and displays forms as an example. Interactive components facilitate easy navigation around the workflow model, so that Lexecute can also meet the requirement of user friendliness. Abs. 24
The user interface consists of three windows: the navigation tree, the so-called info-box and the work flow model. The explorer-like navigation tree facilitates easy access to all abstraction levels of the model. Incidentally, navigation is also possible via the model itself. The workflow model represents the selected legal process in the form of an event-driven process chain (EPC) and contains different abstraction levels. The viewer can call up the more sophisticated functions by double-clicking. Organisational units expand the model to show the respective task owners. In addition the model also shows the relevant data sources. The info-box contains the attributes specified for the legal domain(35) and makes it possible, amongst other things, to call up the major statutory provisions and necessary forms. Abs. 25
The type of representation selected meets the requirements of transparency and clarity and illustrates that even complex processes can be represented - as the need may be - in great detail and yet intelligibly.
JurPC Web-Dok.
28/2006, Abs. 26

Foot Notes:

* The authors are Research Assistants in the Department of Civil Law, Law of Civil Procedure and Legal Philosophy chaired by Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Helmut Rüßmann.
(2) The team consists of the two authors and: Dr.-Ing. Jörn Freiheit (Max Planck Institute for Informatics), Dipl.-Kfm., M.Sc. Fabrice Zangl (Institute for Business Informatics), Dr. iur. Hendrik Schöttle, Ass. jur. Marc Luuk, Dr. phil. Tinka Reichmann and cand. jur. Mathias Gisch (Institute for Law and Informatics).
(3) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin et al., 2002, p. 740-760 (p 740).
(4) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.; Habermann, F.; Köppen, A.: "Electronic Business und Knowledge Management-Neue Dimensionen für den Unternehmungserfolg", in: Scheer, A.-W.(ed.): "Electronic Business und Knowledge Management-Neue Dimensionen für den Unternehmungserfolg", Heidelberg 1999 , p. 3-36.
(5) On definition of the terms model and information model cf. Andres, Th.: "Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem: Modellgetriebene Entwicklung betriebswirtschaftlicher Software", in: OBJEKTSpektrum, issue "Model-driven Development"/2005, see http://www.sigs.de/ publications/os/2005/MDD/Andres_MDA_OS_2005.pdf, 17.01.2006.
(6) On the heterogenous term "service" see Scheer, A.-W.: ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 13f.
(7) So far, it appears that no uniform definition of the term business process has emerged in literature (a.o. Davenport, T; Hammer, M.; Scheer, A.-W.). On Scheer's definition, see: Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 3; id.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung, in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (742); Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (439), with a reference to Rosemann, M.: "Beschreibung und Gestaltung der Produktion auf der Basis Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Prozessmodellierung", in: IDG (eds.): "Tagungsband Re-Engineering-Kongreß", Frankfurt am Main, 1994, p. 52-86.
(8) Int. al., Becker, J.; Rosemann, M.; Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 1995), p. 435-445 (435).
(9) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.: ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al. ) 2002, p. 4.; ibid, p. 26.
(10) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin et al., 2002, p. 740-760 (p. 741).
(11) On individual modelling methods for representation of business processes cf. Lindert, F.; Messer, B.; Striemer, R. [et al.]: "Geschäftsprozeßmodellierung und Workflow-Management: Forschungs- und Entwicklungsbedarf im Rahmen der Entwicklungsbegleitenden Normung (EBN)", Berlin [et al.], 1st ed. 1996 (DIN-Fachbericht; 50); gaps and limitations of the current business modelling methods are examined by Dalal, Nikunj P.; Kamath, Manjunath; Kolarik, William J.; Sivaraman, Eswar: "Towards an Integrated Framework for Modeling Enterprise Processes", in: Communications of the ACM, March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3, page 83-87 (84ff.).
(12) See: Reisig, W.: "Petrinetze - eine Einführung", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.,) 1991; Starke, P.H.: "Petri-Netze: Grundlagen, Anwendungen, Theorie", Berlin 1980.
(13) See: Scheer, A.-W.; Keller, G.; Nüttgens, M.: "Semantische Prozeßmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Prozeßketten (EPK)", in: Scheer, A.-W. (eds.): Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Vol. 89, Saarbrücken 1992; Scheer, A.-W.; Keller, G.; Nüttgens, M.: "Modellierung mit Ereignisgesteuerten Prozeßketten", in: Scheer, A.-W. (ed.): Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Vol. 101, Saarbrücken 1994; id.: "Architektur integrierter Informationssysteme - Grundlagen der Unternehmensmodellierung", 2nd ed., Berlin (et al.), 1992; id.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 20.
(14) See Andres, Th.: "Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem: Modellgetriebene Entwicklung betriebswirtschaftlicher Software", in: OBJEKTSpektrum, edition "Model-driven Development"/2005, see http://www.sigs.de/ publications/os/2005/MDD/Andres_MDA_OS_2005.pdf, 17.01.2006; see also Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Modellierungsmethoden, Metamodelle, Anwendungen", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2001, p. 53ff., 67ff.; id.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 11f.
(15) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 1f.
(16) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (741).
(17) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 1f.
(18) On the "organisational framework" of the total of six general modelling principles and their method-specific practical implementation in the example of EPC see Becker, J.; Rosemann, M.; Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (437ff., 441ff.).
(19) See Batini, C.; Ceri, S.; Navathe, S. B.: "Conceptual Database Design-An Entity-Relationship Approach", Redwood City, California, 1992; Becker, J.; Rosemann, M.; Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (437f.); Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.) , 2002, p. 740-760 (744).
(20) See Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (744); Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (438, 439).
(21) Cf. Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (438f.).
(22) Cf. Schütte, R.: "Grundsätze ordnungsgemäßer Modellierung", in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 37 (1995), p. 435-445 (439); Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (747f.)
(23) See Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al. ), 2002, p. 740-760 (745).
(24) On different views and their combination, see Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (747ff.); Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4. Aufl., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 16f.
(25) On the comparison between event-driven process chains (EPC) and Petri nets see: Chen, R.; Scheer, A.-W.: "Modellierung von Prozessketten mittels Petri-Netz-Theorie", in: Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Vol. 107, Saarbrücken 1994.
(26) See Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, p. 740-760 (745).
(27) See Scheer, A.-W.; Thomas, O.; Wagner, D.: "Verfahren und Werkzeuge zur Unternehmensmodellierung", in: Bullinger, H.-J.; Warnecke, H. J.; Westkämper, E. (eds.): "Neue Organisationsformen im Unternehmen: ein Handbuch für das moderne Management", 2nd rev. and exp. ed., Berlin (et al.), 2002, P. 740-760 (745)
(28) For a more in-depth differentiation, see Kugeler, M.: "Informationsmodellbasierte Organisationsgestaltung - Modellierungskonventionen und Referenzvorgehensmodell zur prozessorientierten Reorganisation", Berlin 2000, p. 98-104. On modelling as a preliminary stage to configuration of process management systems see also Kronz, A.: "Einführung von Workflow-Systemen mit ARIS Modellen", in: Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Modellierungsmethoden, Metamodelle, Anwendungen", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2001, p. 184ff.
(29) On analysis und simulation within the context of the ARIS concept see Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-House of Business Engineering: Von der Geschäftsprozessmodellierung zur Workflow-gesteuerten Anwendung; vom Business Process Reengineering zum Continuous Process Improvement", in: Scheer. A.-W. (eds.): Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Vol. 133, Saarbrücken 1996, p. 8, 13.
(30) Cf. Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 2.; on the extension of the concept of production factors in terms of non-material services see Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS-Vom Geschäftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem", 4th ed., Berlin (et al.) 2002, p. 20 with a reference to Kern, W: "Industrielle Produktionswirtschaft", 5th ed., Stuttgart 1992, p. 12.
(31) Cf. Federal Constitutional Court, decision dated 24 March 1964 (Ref: 2 BvR 42/63), BVerfGE 17, 294
(32) Cf. Freiheit, J.; Münch, S.; Schöttle, H.; Sijanski, G.; Zangl, F.: "Enhanced Workflow Models as a Tool for Judicial Practitioners", in: Meersman, R. et al. (eds.), "Lecture Notes in Computer Science", Volume 3762, Springer, Berlin (et al.) 2005.
(33) Scheer, A.-W.: "ARIS Modellierungsmethoden, Metamodelle, Anwendungen", Berlin, 2001.
(34) Sanchez, R.; Mahoney, J.T.: "Modularity, Flexibility, and Knowledge Management in Product and Organization Design", in: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 (1996), Special Edition, p. 63-76.
(35) See table below paragraph IV.2

* The authors are Research Assistants in the Department of Civil Law, Law of Civil Procedure and Legal Philosophy chaired by Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Helmut Rüßmann.
[online since: 24.02.2006 ]
Zitiervorschlag: Autor, Titel, JurPC Web-Dok., Abs.
Zitiervorschlag: Sijanski, Grozdana, Modelling Legal Proceedings - JurPC-Web-Dok. 0028/2006


Top 10

kein element gefunden
Anzeige
notarprompt
 
kein element gefunden
kein element gefunden
Anzeige
notarprompt
 
kein element gefunden
kein element gefunden
Anzeige
notarprompt
 
kein element gefunden
kein element gefunden
Anzeige
notarprompt
 
kein element gefunden

Klassiker

JurPC App