A design pattern for integration of business process management systems

A cross-domain workflow application may be constructed using a standard reference model such as the one by the Workflow Management Coalition (WfMC) [7] but the requirements for this type of application are inherently different from one organization to another. The existing models and systems built around them meet some but not all the requirements from all the organizations involved in a collaborative process. Furthermore the requirements change over time. This makes the applications difficult to develop and distribute. Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) based approaches such as the BPET (Business Process Execution Language) intend to provide a solution but fail to address the problems sufficiently, especially in the situations where the expectations and level of skills of the users (e.g. the participants of the processes) in different organisations are likely to be different. In this paper, we discuss a design pattern that provides a novel approach towards a solution. In the solution, business users can design the applications at a high level of abstraction: the use cases and user interactions; the designs are documented and used, together with the data and events captured later that represents the user interactions with the systems, to feed an intermediate component local to the users -the IFM (InterFace Mapper) -which bridges the gaps between the users and the systems. We discuss the main issues faced in the design and prototyping. The approach alleviates the need for re-programming with the APIs to any back-end service thus easing the development and distribution of the applications

Leadership and management standards in the UK Lifelong Learning sector

Leadership and Management Standards in the UK Lifelong Learning Sector. Presentation on research findings on leadership and management in the LLS sector, in the context of UK government policy changes introducing the 2007 Principals' Qualifying Programme (PQP) delivered by the Centre for Excellence in Leadership (CEL)/Learning and Skills Improvement Service (LSIS). Discusses the role of standards in leadership and management professional practice and development and sums up the history of development of standards in relation to the National Occupational Standards (NOS) for Leadership and Management, based on the UK Management Standards Centre (MSC) Institute for Leadership and Management Standards. Discusses the Lifelong Learning UK (LLUK) Benchmark Role Specification for Principals in FE, Sixth Form and Specialist Colleges and the fact that the LSIS PQP has adopted those as part of its programme for Principal development. In the context of the implementation of standards for leadership and management, discusses the importance of values-based and research-informed leadership and the development of trust in lifelong learning sector institutions, given the multiple challenges facing vocational education and training (VET) institutions and the relative lack of recognition and support for the difficult roles taken on by Principals and senior leaders.

Reflection is alive and well, but not what you think

More and more, Business and Management students (and those in other disciplines) are being asked to undertake written reflection upon their learning as part of assessed course-work. This paper examines this trend and explores the thinking behind it: why lecturers see reflection as valuable to students, whether they undertake reflection themselves, what theoretical underpinning they perceive as justifying and explaining their views. The results of a survey undertaken among Business and Management lecturers are reported, which appear to show that the most influential writer on the subject of reflection in learning – the one most frequently cited by the respondents – is David A. Kolb, author of the well-known Experiential Learning Theory (1984), and one of the moving forces behind experiential learning in general. His ideas have attracted a good deal of criticism, but are still current, having been suitably updated and defended, (2005). The paper critically re-examines Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory, challenging its relevance to most of Higher Education, as characterised by Peter Jarvis in his useful table of learning situations as “formal and intended” (2004; 108). Other criticisms of Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory are advanced that are entirely new. Returning to the survey, the papers discusses the reasons lecturers believe reflection is valuable to students and concludes that Kolb’s model, and others such as Schön’s (1987), fail to adequately explain or even identify them.