Environmental Monitoring Workflow: BPMN Version 2
Environmental Monitoring
Meeting Chart 1 - as plotted in the community design meeting
Meeting Discussion 1 - as presented in the community design meeting
Meeting Chart 2 - as plotted in the community design meeting
Meeting Discussion 2 - as presented in the community design meeting
Statens Museum for Kunst/KV
We have no comments, as our expert in this area is not available for consultation.
First thing is that the initial step will not always be a problem, it might be just a regular monitoring process, could replace it with [Define Issue] or [Define Scope].
We may also need a separate process called [Environmental Survey] or [Environmental Research], to cover examining new materials and equipment to improve conditions.
I was wondering of the {Confirmation} and {Investigative} options should be separated out, there would also need to be an additional option of {Monitor}, on going general monitoring rather than for a specific issue. These options become more important I think when it comes to the software development, for example if you are confirming something you may just need a tick box, but for investigations you would need free text comment, where as for general monitoring it would be open ended other perhaps yes its been set-up.
Ok the work flow, I think this one might need some adjustment:
Some situations may require [Consultation] during the [Define ..] step, so we could have a two way arrow to [Consultation].
I am unclear what the [Scheduling] process is.
As for Damage/ Incident Response it might be good to define a [Non Immediate] and [Immediate] option to schedule when the process would need to take place.
We would also need to [Schedule] how often measurements should be taken, is it a one off, weekly, hourly etc.
After the timing issues we will need two options, such as (but with shorter names
) [Related to Existing Process] and [New Monitoring Process].
[New Monitoring Process]
==> [Budget Considerations]
==> [Select and Buy New Equipment] [Consultation]
==> [Borrow Equipment] [Consultation]
==> [Setup Equipment] [Maintenance] Possible external work
==> [Begin Monitoring]
==> [Continue Monitoring]
==> [Record Data]
==> [Continue Monitoring]
==> [End Process, decommission store equipment, etc.]
[Related to Existing Process]
==> [Check Equipment] [Maintenance] Possible external work
==> [Continue Monitoring]
==> [Record Data]
==> [Continue Monitoring]
==> [End Process, decommission store equipment, etc.]
There is a clear loop here of [Continue Monitoring] and [Record Data], this loop will also have connect back up with [Check Equipment].
As a possible parallel to continued monitoring or following the end of the monitoring stage [Data Interpretation] will take place. The exact form would depend on the {Confirmation}/{Investigative}/{Monitor} option. This would lead to [Data Evaluation].
Interpretation and evaluation may well be carried out together but they can be separate steps. This would then lead to the production of reports and recommendations. Evaluation would also lead on to further steps:
[Consultation] which could then lead back to the [Define] step to begin again.
[End Process]: we checked it, its ok.
[Treatment], [Movement], etc we need to respond to the problems.
[Update Procedure], definition of best practice.
[Update Equipment], new lights, new heating systems, etc
[Continue Monitoring]
All recorded data and reports would be archived as a mater of course, not just at the end.
I am not to clear what the four steps, Education, etc.. at the bottom left are. Are they supposed to be [Actions] ? The arrow indicates that they lead to actions, so are they further Initiators ?
I agree with comments of Jo Padfield; along with word ‘trigger’ you might consider the word ‘protocol’ to the first step, since environmental monitoring usually refers to a ongoing regular process. This is not a clear worksflow and it is not clear what is referred to here. Also In many museums you may want to consider that this is mainly carried out by Technical services in collaboration with Conservation. Often outside expertise is involved from the beginning as part of environmental research or testing.