<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://www.enterprisearchitecture.management/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Trends%3ABPM_Ontology</id>
		<title>Trends:BPM Ontology - Revision history</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.enterprisearchitecture.management/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Trends%3ABPM_Ontology"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.enterprisearchitecture.management/index.php?title=Trends:BPM_Ontology&amp;action=history"/>
		<updated>2026-07-06T11:33:08Z</updated>
		<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.24.2</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.enterprisearchitecture.management/index.php?title=Trends:BPM_Ontology&amp;diff=5203&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Admin: Created page with &quot;{{DISPLAYTITLE: BPM Ontology}} == The BPM Ontology Trend == Many BPM and or process frameworks, methods and approaches like LEAN, Sig Sigma, BPR, TQM, Zero Defect, BPMN, BPMS...&quot;</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.enterprisearchitecture.management/index.php?title=Trends:BPM_Ontology&amp;diff=5203&amp;oldid=prev"/>
				<updated>2017-01-10T13:41:39Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Created page with &amp;quot;{{DISPLAYTITLE: BPM Ontology}} == The BPM Ontology Trend == Many BPM and or process frameworks, methods and approaches like LEAN, Sig Sigma, BPR, TQM, Zero Defect, BPMN, BPMS...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;{{DISPLAYTITLE: BPM Ontology}}&lt;br /&gt;
== The BPM Ontology Trend ==&lt;br /&gt;
Many BPM and or process frameworks, methods and approaches like LEAN, Sig Sigma, BPR, TQM, Zero Defect, BPMN, BPMS etc., have their own vocabulary. Each of these vocabularies has its own definition of terms like business process, process step, process activity, events, process role, process owner, process measure or process rule. This variety of definitions might hamper communication. On the one hand, the same word might have different meanings in different frameworks, methods and approaches (i.e. homonymy). On the other hand, different words might have the exact same meaning in various frameworks, methods and approaches (i.e. synonymy).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When communicating, people are often unaware of homonymy and synonymy and expect the same words to have the same meaning and different words to have a different meaning, which might lead to miscommunication between people with different backgrounds (i.e. with training in a different framework, method or approach).  What is needed is a shared vocabulary (e.g. a folksonomy) that ensures a consistent use of terms.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a weak interpretation, such a folksonomy could be used as a central ontology to which all framework, method and approach vocabularies are mapped to determine which words have the same and which words have a different meaning in different frameworks, methods and approaches. In a strong interpretation, such a central ontology that defines fundamental process concepts, and the relations between them (e.g., the ability to define a sequence of process steps), could be used as the reference vocabulary to describe, document and structure process knowledge.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Both interpretations would profit from a validated reference ontology. Hence, the need for a BPM ontology that can be applied within the area of process modelling, process engineering and process architecture is clear.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category: Solution Trends]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Admin</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>