Parallel Doer Completion Using Split FMS
About the Client
The client uses MIDAP (MI Digital Autopilot) to manage structured workflows and assign operational tasks to multiple Doers. Their business process required two Doers to work on the same workflow stage simultaneously, while maintaining complete automation and synchronization between their activities.
As the workflow became more complex, the client needed a specific parallel execution behavior that was not available through MIDAP’s standard parallel workflow configuration.
The Parallel Workflow Challenge
The client required a workflow where a single step would be opened for two Doers at the same time.
The key requirement was that both Doers should receive their own task independently. However, the workflow needed to recognize that the business activity was complete as soon as either one of the two Doers completed the step.
When one Doer completed the task, the corresponding task assigned to the second Doer also needed to be automatically marked as completed.
The challenge was that MIDAP’s standard parallel workflow was not designed to automatically close the remaining parallel task when one Doer completed their assigned task.
This created several workflow limitations:
- The same workflow stage needed to be assigned to two Doers simultaneously.
- Completion by one Doer needed to trigger completion of the other Doer’s task.
- The standard parallel workflow could not automatically synchronize the two tasks in this way.
- The steps also had reopen functionality, adding another layer of complexity to the workflow.
- The requirement could not be achieved through the standard FMS configuration without changing the existing workflow behavior.
The client therefore needed a solution that could provide the required synchronization without modifying the core parallel workflow mechanism.
What the Client Needed
The client wanted to maintain the existing business process while introducing a more flexible method of handling the two Doers.
The required workflow needed to ensure:
- The same operational step opens for two Doers simultaneously.
- Each Doer receives an independent task.
- If either Doer completes the task, the other Doer’s corresponding task is automatically completed.
- No manual intervention is required to close the remaining task.
- Existing business logic and workflow stages remain intact.
- The solution does not require modification of MIDAP’s core parallel workflow functionality.
- The approach can be reused for similar workflow requirements in the future.
The primary objective was simple:
Allow two Doers to work in parallel while treating the first successful completion as completion of the shared workflow requirement.
Designing the Solution with Split FMS
To address the limitation of the standard parallel workflow, the solution was designed using Split FMS.
Instead of relying on the existing parallel workflow functionality, the process was structured so that the main FMS could automatically generate a Split FMS at the required stage.
After the user completes the Basic Submission in the Main FMS, the workflow moves to Step 1. At this point, a Split FMS is automatically created.
The Split FMS creates separate instances of Step 1 for the two Doers. This allows both Doers to receive the task independently while keeping the overall process connected to the original workflow.
The important part of the solution is the completion logic.
When either Doer completes their Step 1, the system identifies the corresponding Step 1 assigned to the other Doer and automatically marks it as completed.
This effectively creates the required “one completes, both complete” behavior without modifying the standard parallel workflow.
How the Updated Workflow Works
The redesigned process follows a clear sequence:
1. Basic Submission is completed
The user completes the required Basic Submission in the Main FMS.
2. Workflow moves to Step 1
Once the Basic Submission is completed, the Main FMS progresses to Step 1.
3. Split FMS is automatically created
The system automatically generates a Split FMS for handling the parallel execution requirement.
4. Step 1 is assigned to both Doers
Separate Step 1 tasks are created and assigned independently to the two designated Doers.
5. Either Doer completes the task
Both Doers can work on their assigned Step 1 independently.
6. Remaining task is automatically completed
When one Doer completes Step 1, the system automatically marks the corresponding Step 1 assigned to the other Doer as completed.
7. Workflow proceeds
Once the completion condition is satisfied, the workflow proceeds to the next stage without requiring manual closure of the remaining task.
This creates synchronization between the two task instances while preserving the overall workflow structure.
Example of the Workflow Behavior
Consider a workflow where Doer A and Doer B are both assigned Step 1.
Initially:
- Doer A → Step 1: Pending
- Doer B → Step 1: Pending
If Doer A completes Step 1:
- Doer A → Step 1: Completed
- Doer B → Step 1: Automatically Completed
The workflow can then proceed to the next stage.
The same logic works in reverse.
If Doer B completes the task first:
- Doer B → Step 1: Completed
- Doer A → Step 1: Automatically Completed
This ensures that the workflow does not remain unnecessarily open simply because the second Doer has not manually completed their task.
Key Features Implemented
The customized Split FMS solution introduced several important capabilities:
- Simultaneous task assignment: The same workflow stage can be opened for two Doers at the same time.
- Automatic Split FMS creation: The Split FMS is generated automatically after the Basic Submission.
- Independent task instances: Each Doer receives their own Step 1 task.
- Automatic completion synchronization: Completion by one Doer automatically completes the corresponding task for the other.
- Zero manual intervention: Administrators or users do not need to manually close the remaining task.
- Existing workflow preserved: The solution works without modifying the core parallel workflow.
- Reusable architecture: The approach can be applied to similar business processes requiring synchronized parallel execution.
Impact on Workflow Efficiency
The implementation addressed the client’s specific workflow limitation while keeping the process automated and structured.
The client achieved:
- Successful simultaneous assignment of tasks to two Doers
- Automatic synchronization between parallel task instances
- Elimination of unnecessary manual task closures
- Improved workflow continuity
- Reduced chances of workflows remaining open unnecessarily
- Better alignment between the system workflow and the actual business process
- A reusable approach for similar parallel execution requirements
Most importantly, the solution ensured that the workflow responded to the actual business completion condition, rather than simply waiting for every parallel task to be manually closed.
A Flexible Alternative to Standard Parallel Workflow
The key advantage of this implementation was that the client did not need to alter MIDAP’s core parallel workflow functionality.
Instead, Split FMS provided the flexibility required to build a customized execution pattern around the existing workflow.
This allowed the client to achieve a specialized business rule:
When either assigned Doer completes the required activity, the corresponding task for the other Doer is automatically considered complete.
This approach demonstrates how workflow requirements that fall outside standard configurations can be addressed through structured FMS design rather than manual intervention or changes to the core system.
Conclusion
By implementing the workflow using Split FMS, the client successfully achieved a parallel execution model tailored to their business requirement.
Two Doers can now receive the same workflow step simultaneously, work independently, and have their tasks automatically synchronized when either one completes the activity.
The solution eliminated manual intervention, preserved the existing business process, and avoided modifications to MIDAP’s core parallel workflow.
As a result, the client gained a more flexible, automated, and scalable workflow structure that can also serve as a reusable model for similar parallel task-completion requirements.
