ARIS Community - We Love BPM

Missing relationships

RGilyead's picture
by Richard Gilyead in ARIS Express posted on 2009-08-03

I notice that the IT System, Database, and Entity objects are all included in process models. However, there is nowhere to define which IT System uses which Database or which Database contains which Entity.

Is Express supposed to support a coherent, complete metamodel of its own or will it only work in conjunction with full ARIS?


Sorry there are no tags
There are no attachments
Frank Weyand posted on 2009-08-03


please do not forget: ARIS Express is tailored for BPM starters. It is not made to and simply can't replace professional products. It does not provide data reusage, repository based queries, publishing functionality and much more.

Best regards,


Richard Gilyead posted on 2009-08-03


I don't understand your reply. I didn't mention anything about data reusage, repository-based queries or publishing.

What I meant was, that if a modelling tool contains multiple object types then it should enable modelling of all relevant relationships between them. Otherwise, leave them out.

If I, as a modeller, give a set of models to someone else then they had better be self-consistent. Otherwise, I will have to give a separate explanation of what these missing relationships are.

Personally, I think this undermines the value of the tool.

Best regards,


Richard Gilyead posted on 2009-08-11

Any response to my comment? How can Express be used to create a consistent set of models? Or is it not intended as a standalone product?

Sebastian Stein posted on 2009-08-11

Hi Richard,

while selecting the different objects for the meta model of ARIS Express, we decided that we are not aiming at a consistent meta model, but instead at a pragmatic one. We expect that most people will be just interested in using 1 or 2 of the provided model types, but not all of them. Again, we are not trying to provide a tool for enterprise modelling, but for entry users in the BPM domain.



Richard Gilyead posted on 2009-08-13


What is pragmatic about leaving out basic relationships between objects in the model? It just means that the modeller has to expalin these realtionships some other way e.g. in a document or another modelling tool. What's pragmatic about that?


Sebastian Stein posted on 2009-08-13

Hi Richard,

you asked why we have "holes" in the meta model of ARIS Express. I tried to explain to you that we did not intended to create a consistent meta model, but to focus on every single model type. Each model type should be easy to use with the most common objects only (I know, you would have selected other object types). That is a pragmatic approach and not one driven by modelling theory. If we had tried to create a consistent meta model, additional relationships and objects would have been needed in the different diagrams, making everything more complex. But that contradicts with our aim of providing an easy to use tool for BPM entry users.