![](bg7.png)
In order to make sure the business process meets
the requirements of a specific functional area or mod-
ule, yet another customization is performed. The pay-
ment area is extended by adding Calculate Price ac-
tivity. Moreover, the process delivery activity is de-
composed into send delivery information and receive
shipment detail. A swimlane is added for capturing
the shipment activities. This swimlane represents a
shipment process that is executed and managed by a
shipper. A list of events and activities which include
receive delivery information, process shipment, ship
order, send shipment detail are added in the shipment
process.
Furthermore, at this customization phase, the
properties associating with the business process ac-
tivities are specified. The activity type Vital, NonVital
and the policies and quality parameters related to the
business process activities are defined. Approval no-
tification time is a policy assigned to send approval
notification with a data property “time” associating a
value “24”. The policy is characterised by the data
property “Soft” that denotes if the notification is not
sent within 24 hours, the process execution will not be
interrupted. However, the “hard” type policy would
stop the execution of the process if the policy was not
satisfied. Check Inventory activity is associated by the
“hard” type policy. Moreover, the functional proper-
ties repair, retry, and wait are specified for different
activities in this functional area specific process.
As this is the final phase of customizing BPaaS
suite, the software, platform, and infrastructure ser-
vices are customized in this phase. In the given exam-
ple, customization of these services are shown inside
a block of dotted lines.
For the software components (in SaaS), the qual-
ity parameters are defined. Availability and Reliability
are the parameters defined for software services along
with their values “24” hours and “High”. The type of
these parameters is “hard” denotes that these values
must be satisfied at runtime. It is worth noting that,
the lower level services should be customized when
a user confirms that the functional area specific busi-
ness process contains all the required activities.
Considering the customization of software com-
ponents, the simplest case is considered for this exam-
ple. Considering the customization of PaaS, a Google
Web Server is added in the platform. Additionally, the
SampleDB is substituted by the CouchDB. The BPEL
2.0 plug-in and jcloud library are added in the devel-
opment tool that is integrated in the platform service
as a package. Finally, the infrastructure services are
customized. Two Virtual Machine images provided
by the Amazon Inc. are added in the infrastructure to
increase the computation capability of the system. In
addition, a Cloud Storage provided by the Rackspace
Cloud is added in the infrastructure to enhance the
size of the storage.
After finishing the customization tasks, the busi-
ness process, the software components, the platform,
and the physical resources must be assembled to-
gether. The assemble is not shown in the example,
however, it is the last phase in the customization life
cycle.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This paper introduced a novel approach for customiz-
ing BPaaS following the multi-layered approach that
allows fine tuning the BPaaS solutions to satisfy the
enterprise specific requirements. One of the unique
characteristics of our approach is, it underpins tailor-
ing not only the business process services, but also
the SaaS, PaaS and IaaS that implement the business
process services in a transparent, tractable and struc-
tured manner. The research results in this paper are
core results in nature. Extensions and improvements
are needed to validate the customization life-cycle and
mechanisms. The proposed operators will have to be
formalized in near future.
REFERENCES
Columbus, L. (2012). Forecasing public cloud adoption in
the enterprise.
J. Hurwitz, M. Kaufman, F. H. and Kirch, D. (2012). What
is business process as a service(bpaas) in cloud com-
puting?
Leymann, F. and Roller, D. (2000). Production Workflow:
Concepts and Techniques. Printice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
McCue, D. (2012). Business process as a service smbs:
Challenges and opportunities.
Stollberg, M. and Muth, M. (2009). Service customization
by variability modeling. In Proceedings of the 2009
international conference on Service-oriented comput-
ing, ICSOC/ServiceWave’09, pages 425–434, Berlin,
Heidelberg. Springer-Verlag.
Taher, Y., Haque, R., Parkin, M., Heuvel, W.-J., Richardson,
I., and Whelan, E. (2011). A multi-layer approach for
customizing business services. In Huemer, C. and Set-
zer, T., editors, E-Commerce and Web Technologies,
volume 85 of Lecture Notes in Business Information
Processing, pages 64–76. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Zhu, X. and Zheng, X. (2005). A template-based approach
for mass customization of service-oriented e-business
applications. In Proceedings of the 7th international
conference on Electronic commerce, ICEC ’05, pages
706–710, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
CLOSER2013-3rdInternationalConferenceonCloudComputingandServicesScience
296