Cornell University’s Workflow Experiences For Internet2 Workflow Panel - Fall 2006 Aaron Godert Sr. Software Architect/Engineer CIT, Advanced Technology and Architectures 8/9/2019

The Need for Workflow Timeline: ~ year 2001 Software being built around campus by various IT development groups Online = accessible Formalizing business processes in units Each app had its own “list” Common pattern - prepare and send on for approval Vended software being purchased also had business process concepts “Workflow” seemed to come of age 8/9/2019

The Need for Workflow Units started buying tools to model workflow Around 2004 we started to think centrally about it Period of discovery webMethods OpenSymphony Workflow Indiana’s Workflow Metastorm Oracle OpenWFE 8/9/2019

Reasons We Choose Kuali Enterprise Workflow (KEW) Some products didn’t scale for university enterprise applications Some products were excellent at some features, but missing others Some products felt constraining (proprietary integration) KEW had a rich feature set that was closes to the complete package we were looking for Open source Able to participate Control our destiny Close community Flexibility in customization In line with our Kuali strategy 8/9/2019

Cornell’s Future Goals for KEW and Workflow Melding with BPEL concepts Business process orchestration Flow callouts to services Enhanced EDocLite features for simple business processes GUI representation of business processes Kuali Rice - ESB and Notification integration in a productive development environment In general - a convergence towards a best-of-breed 8/9/2019