business process managers

Abstract: LLM agents increasingly divide enterprise work across roles with different goals, authority, access, and information. Because each agent often sees only a local snapshot of the enterprise workflow, locally reasonable actions can still violate organization-wide constraints (e.g., several service agents can each issue credit that is individually permitted while collectively exceeding a shared compensation cap). We introduce EAIR, the first framework for analyzing enterprise multi-agent interaction risks. We make four contributions. (1) We formalize enterprise interaction risk in terms of the organizational properties that workflow operations must preserve, and operationalize this formulation as a taxonomy of testable risks with explicit failure criteria and evidence requirements. (2) We build EAIR-Worlds, a suite of executable micro-worlds that instantiates selected risks as controlled, observable workflows with explicit roles, policies, permissions, source facts, and execution traces. (3) We develop a novel diagnosis-and-repair pipeline that uses the resulting execution traces to locate contributing interaction boundaries, guide targeted workflow repairs, and retest the repaired system. (4) Large-scale experiments show recurring interaction failures across the organizational properties studied. Together, EAIR is the first operational framework for diagnosing and mitigating enterprise multi-agent interaction failures.

Abstract: Business Process Management (BPM) was built on a foundational assumption that organizations are populated primarily by human actors whose work can be made visible, governable, and improvable through process models. That assumption is depreciating. AI agent ecosystems increasingly execute, coordinate, and adapt organizational work with limited human direction, challenging not only BPM's methods but its core conception of what a process is. We argue that BPM faces a constitutive shift from modeling human work to governing autonomous agents, for which we propose two new concepts: the \emph{Process Constitution}, a machine-interpretable, value-laden framework that defines the space of admissible agent behavior, and the \emph{Process Steward}, a governance agent that interprets and enforces it. The central value proposition of this new generation of BPM is not efficiency but \emph{organizational legibility}: the capacity to keep agentic organizations accountable, contestable, and humanly understandable. We outline what this means and sketch the research agenda it opens.

Abstract: Many LLM-as-a-judge evaluations score fixed outputs under a fixed task definition. Production multi-turn business agents instead require a maintained measurement system: correctness depends on business-specific facts and procedures, outcomes emerge across turns, and failures must be attributed to either agent capability or missing business knowledge before they are actionable. We present an integrated methodology spanning evaluation specification, modular LLM judges, intent-preserving user simulation, and human-in-the-loop governance. The specification defines conversation-level end states and actionable failure ownership. Atomic judges share versioned evidence and feed an explicit aggregation graph. The simulator is released only after task-preservation and stability checks. Independent human audits estimate measurement fidelity, renew tiered reference sets, and route disagreements to label correction, guideline revision, or judge improvement. Production studies show that system-level fidelity improved across repeated audits, that human reviewers and automated judges improved together under the shared feedback loop, and that their combined workflow had the strongest descriptive performance in both reported task-completion settings. Because the studies are observational and the human reference itself required revision, these findings demonstrate operational usefulness rather than causal or universal superiority. The contribution is a practical framework for making multi-turn agent measurement reliable, actionable, and maintainable as the evaluated system and its evidence evolve.

Abstract: When safety-critical systems are developed from a known internal specification, their correctness can be established by model checking. In the frequent case where such a specification is unknown or inaccessible, runtime verification presents an attractive alternative, e.g., to ascertain that autonomous and agentic systems as well as business processes satisfy desirable properties and/or comply with safety requirements. In this paper we study anticipatory monitoring, an advanced form of runtime verification, where the monitoring state is determined by both the trace prefix seen so far, and all its possible finite-length, future continuations. We focus on monitoring linear-time properties that may involve arithmetic constraints. Automata-based approaches, the de-facto standard in this setting, are notorious for their computational complexity. We propose an alternative approach based on progression and LTLf satisfiability checking, for both propositional and arithmetic settings. We experimentally compare the automata- and progression-based approaches, and a third method that combines the two. Our experiments suggest that the progression-based approach often succeeds in producing a verdict when the automata constructions do not terminate, especially for the arithmetic setting. For the propositional setting, the combined technique provides a good tradeoff.

Abstract: Process mining has long turned event logs into process knowledge: discovered models, conformance evidence, bottleneck diagnoses, and runtime predictions. Agentic AI changes the target. Process-aware agents will not only ask what happened. They will ask whether a proposed action should be taken, given the available evidence, privacy budget, organizational authority, and downstream risk. This BlueSky paper proposes event-to-action process mining: a process-mining agenda for transforming heterogeneous operational event data into governed action. The goal is not another dashboard, a generic enterprise simulator, or a language interface over logs. We argue that the community needs four mineable artifacts: event-object representations, action evidence packages, governance contracts, and benchmarks where act, defer, ask, and refuse are all valid outputs. This agenda is timely because agentic business process management (BPM), LLM-assisted process mining, object-centric event standards, causal process monitoring, and privacy-preserving learning are maturing separately. Bringing them together defines a data-mining target inside process mining: mining logged organizational behavior for accountable action, not only retrospective insight.

Abstract: Human-AI interaction can improve current performance while changing the capabilities and relationships on which future performance depends. We develop adaptive complementarity, a framework for choosing interaction architecture with these state consequences in view. Access, information exposure, task allocation, timing, and communication can alter which arrangement will be valuable later; their settings can often be reset faster than the capabilities, search patterns, or conventions they create. Three mechanisms organize the argument: information exposure and collective search, delegation and capability evolution, and strategic interdependence and information governance. Their integration yields cross-mechanism implications, including conditions under which a loss of expertise heterogeneity increases the information differentiation required to preserve independent search. We distinguish strong human-AI complementarity from advantage over another workflow and from advantage over an evolving reference policy. A knowledge-coverage illustration shows how different interaction histories can reverse current workflow rankings even at equal human competence. It also separates that result from the incremental value of state feedback, which can be small when a well-chosen stable workflow anticipates learning. The framework directs evaluation toward the states present interaction creates, their consequences for later architectural fit, and the conditions under which observing and responding to them is worthwhile.