Nothing is perfect. Known mistakes are listed below. Please send us any mistakes you spot by email: email@example.com
Find German errata at the bottom.
Second edition errata
- Fig. 2.2, page 42: The label “Procure Products” is wrong, it should be “Produce Products”.
- Fig. 2.3, page 43: The label “Procure Products” is wrong, it should be “Produce Products”.
- Page 44: “All of these different production variants refer
to the single “Procure Products” element in Figure 2.3.” should be “…to the single “Handle Job Application” element…”
- Page 44: “includes order booking, billing, shipment, and delivery” should be “includes order booking, billing, shipment, and payment”
- Page 52: It should be APQC, twice it is written APCQ.
- Figure 3.16, page 100. The labels on the sequence flow coming out from
the first exclusive gateway switched. Labels “product in stock” and “product
not in stock” should be swapped.
- Page 102: the activity “Make payment” is not featured in the example in Fig. 3.16. The text should be: “Make payment” (not present in Fig. 3.16).” An example of incoming message for this activity would be “Payment details” (received upon activity start), while and example of outgoing message would be “Payment”(sent upon activity completion).
- Figure 5.15(b), the gateway that comes after task “Handle Dispatch Advice”
should be a parallel join gateway (AND-join) and not an exclusive merge
- Solution 5.8-5.11, pp. 199-202, the label of the “Approve necessity…” activity should be “Approve necessity of purchase & policy conformance”, not “of travel”.
- Solution 5.15, pp. 203-204, “Second, after the handling of a change request,
the process should resume from the order checking, but the model
suggests that the order registration is also to be repeated.” This statement
is incorrect and should be deleted. In the process model in Figure 5.14, the
order registration is never repeated.
- Chapter 6.3, page 235, “PICK is an acronym standing for Possible, Implement,
Challenge, and Kil.” The last word should be “Kill”.
- page 253: “casual factor chart” should be “causal factor chart”
- Chapter 7.1.2, page 262, “calculate the so-called the Theoretical” should be “calculate the so-called Theoretical” (there has to be one “the” less)
- Chapter 7.1.2, page 262, Example 3.7 (page 90). The pointer should refer to Example 3.7 (page 91).
- Chapter 7.1.3, page 265: “… we observe that the early start and finish times are the same…” should be “we observe that early and late start and finish times are the same…”
- Chapter 7.1.4, page 266, Footnote 1, first sentence: the word “throughout” should be “throughput”.
- Footnote 2, pp. 267, “used a synonym” should be “used as synonym”.
- Example 7.5, p. 269: Using the above equations, the unit loads of the three tasks assigned to the clerk are 2 h (“Check completeness”), 3 h (“Check credit history”), and 0.5 h (“Check income sources”). The end of this statement should be: …0.5 h (“Check credit history”), and 3 h (“Check income sources”).
- Example p. 269: The following calculation is incorrect: “the unit load of the credit office pool is 2+0.6×2+0.4×0.5 = 5.2 working hours. Again, this means that each loan application takes on average 5.2 h from the credit officers pool“. The corrected statement is: “the unit load of the credit office pool is 2+0.6×2+0.4×0.5 = 3.4 working hours. Again, this means that each loan application takes on average 3.4 h from the credit officers pool“
- Example 7.6, p. 269, last paragraph: “And since each instance requires 5.2 h from them, their theoretical capacity is 24/5.2 = 4.62 loan applications per day (i.e., μ = 4.62 for the credit officer pool).” In line with the corrected version of Example 7.5, this statement should be “And since each instance requires 3.4 h from them, their theoretical capacity is 24/3.4 = 7.06 loan applications per day (i.e., μ = 7.06 for the credit officer pool).“
- Example 7.7, p. 270: Given the corrections made in examples 7.5 and 7.6, the following statement should also be corrected “and that of the credit officer pool is 3/4.62 ∼ 0.65“. The corrected version of this statement is: “and that of the credit officer pool is 3/7.06 ∼ 0.42.”
- Chapter 7.1.6, page 272, Example 3.7 (page 90). This pointer should refer to Example 3.7 (page 91).
- Solution to exercise 7.4, page 289. The answer states: “Task B has a slack of 10. The critical path includes all tasks except B.” However, task B does not contain a slack but task C does. Therefore, the answer should be: “Task C has a slack of 10. The critical path includes all tasks except C.”
- P. 317: The third column in Fig. 8.4 should be Case Assignment and Triage instead of Empower and Triage.
- Exercise 8.20 refers to Example 6.15, but there is no Example 6.15 in the
book. Instead, Exercise 8.20 should refer to Exercise 6.15.
- Solution 8.5 is lacking the answer to the fourth item in Exercise 8.5.
The missing answer is as follows:
A robot carries out part of a surgical procedure, in this way replacing an activity that was previously completely carried out by a surgeon.”: Above all, this can lead to an improvement in quality, as the robot is likely to be more accurate and consistent in its interventions. Costs are likely to be higher, at least in the short term, due to the high costs of development and maintenance of such surgical robots. The time of the surgery might be reduced.
- Solution 9.6, page 366: The answer should be:
- auditing agency: Rule Enforcement
- company clients: Execution Transparency
- insurance organization: Flexible System Integration
- On page 378, Exercise 10.4 points at Exercise 10.2 (page 375). It should
be page 376.
- Solutions to exercises, pp. 403–404, the numbering of solutions 10.4 to 10.7
is incorrect. The correct numbering is as follows:
- Solution 10.4 should be Solution 10.7
- Solution 10.5 should be Solution 10.4
- Solution 10.6 should be Solution 10.5
- Solution 10.7 should be Solution 10.6
- Exercise 10.12, page 406, “Identify which of these models…” should be “Identify which of these processes…”
- Page 428, “two distinct traces where c occurs immediately before a” ,should read “immediately after a”.
- Section 11.4, page 432, description of the alpha algorithm, step 5.b) should read: Eliminating b→d and c→d if there exists some (b#c)→d.
- Figure 11.12, page 437, the set of potential task connections, XL, for the given log does not contain any direct succession between c and f; there should not be the two XOR gateways between c and f.
- Figure 11.20, page 455, in the third process model (from the top), just before the AND-split gateway, it is written c=11 and p=0, but it should be c=1 and p=1.
- Solution 11.3, p. 466, “(blue = efficiency improved, yellow = neutral, red = efficiency
increased).” This text should be “(… red = efficiency decreased).”
- Solution 11.5, pp. 466, “Therefore, we get L = f [a, b, g, h, j, k, i, l], [a, c,
d, e, f, g, j, h, i, k, l], 2 [a, c, f, g, j, h, i, k, l].” This solution is incorrect.
The solution states that the third trace occurs twice, but it occurs only once.
On other hand hand, the first trace occurs twice (trace 1 and trace 4 have the
same sequence of activities). Hence the correct solution is: L = [a, b,
g, h, j, k, i, l], [a, c, d, e, f, g, j, h, i, k, l], [a, c, f, g, j, h, i, k, l].
- Exercise 11.20, page 470, “Consider the following event log…” In this sentence, the “following event log” refers to the event log shown in the table in the next page (page 471). There are five activities in the event log, not four.
- Exercise 11.20, pages 470. The event log to which this exercise refers (shown as a table in page 471) contains an incorrect timestamp in the following line:
2 Send Reminder 19-04-2017 10:00:00
The correct timestamp is:
2 Send Reminder 19-05-2017 10:00:00
With this correction, the events in this table appear in perfect chronological order.
- page 477: “In contract” should be “In contrast”
- page 480: After the paragraph on peole, the following paragraph on culture is missing:
“Culture measures the degree to which process change is embraced in the organization. In this context, we get process participants involved in active process change and train their process thinking. We demonstrate benefits of process redesign in order to make process participants see and accept their value. We report quantitative improvements to process managers to strengthen their support for BPM.”
The errata for the first edition of our book can be downloaded here.
Nichts ist perfekt. Bekannte Fehler werden hier aufgeführt. Falls weitere Fehler auffallen, bitte eine kurze Email senden an: firstname.lastname@example.org
Deutsche Übersetzung der zweiten Auflage
- Seite 211: “Ereignisse dürfen keinen ausgehenden Sequenzfluss haben” sollte heißen “Endereignisse dürfen keinen ausgehenden Sequenzfluss haben.
- Seite 214: “Anschließend haben wir eine sechsstufige Prozessmodellierungsmethode beschrieben” sollte heißen “Anschließend haben wir eine fünfstufige Prozessmodellierungsmethode beschrieben”.