Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI & Society

aiqbench analysis

This paper proposes a pedagogical framework integrating AI-decision checkpoints into Business Process Management curricula to treat AI as a core design element rather than an add-on. By embedding these checkpoints within a lifecycle-driven teaching case, the study aims to equip future process developers with the skills to rigorously evaluate AI components for their impact on time, cost, and organizational constraints. The approach demonstrates potential in distinguishing between simple task automation and deeper process-level value creation through structured evaluation.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

AI-Decision Checkpoints for AI-Augmented Business Process Management: Framework and Educational Instantiation

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.06207v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and AI agents are increasingly embedded in operational business processes. Yet Business Process Management (BPM) curricula and frameworks still largely treat artificial intelligence (AI) as an add-on technology, leaving graduates (as potential future process developers) unprepared to reason about AI as a first-class design element of end-to-end processes. This paper addresses that gap by proposing \emph{AI-decision checkpoints}: explicit moments in a process development trajectory where process developers identify AI-candidate sub-processes, assess expected effects on time, cost, quality, and flexibility, consider legal and organisational constraints, and document a reasoned decision to adopt, constrain, or reject specific AI components. The checkpoints are instantiated through a fictitious customer onboarding process as a \textit{BPM Teaching Case}, embedded in a lifecycle-driven framework spanning six modules that combine process modeling, simulation, workflow execution with AI agents, and process mining, with each module's output serving as the next module's input. A preliminary formative reflection draws on instructor observations, submitted artifacts, and discovered process maps from learning-management-system logs. These exploratory observations suggest that the approach supported clearer distinctions between task-level automation and process-level value.

Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and AI agents are increasingly embedded in operational business processes. Yet Business Process Management (BPM) curricula and frameworks still largely treat artificial intelligence (AI) as an add-on technology, leaving graduates (as potential future process developers) unprepared to reason about AI as a first-class design element of end-to-end processes. This paper addresses that gap by proposing \emph{AI-decision checkpoints}: explicit moments in a process development trajectory where process developers identify AI-candidate sub-processes, assess expected effects on time, cost, quality, and flexibility, consider legal and organisational constraints, and document a reasoned decision to adopt, constrain, or reject specific AI components. The checkpoints are instantiated through a fictitious customer onboarding process as a \textit{BPM Teaching Case}, embedded in a lifecycle-driven framework spanning six modules that combine process modeling, simulation, workflow execution with AI agents, and process mining, with each module's output serving as the next module's input. A preliminary formative reflection draws on instructor observations, submitted artifacts, and discovered process maps from learning-management-system logs. These exploratory observations suggest that the approach supported clearer distinctions between task-level automation and process-level value.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2610.06207 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.06207v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.06207 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-36710-5_20 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 287 words

Related coverage