Hybrid Enterprise Modelling: Integrating Modelling Mechanisms for Socio-Technical Systems Analysis and Design

Amjad Fayoumi, Pericles Loucopoulos, Ayham Fayyoumi

Department of Informatics and Telematics, Harokopio University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Department of Information Systems, Al-Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic Uni- versity, Riyadh, KSA.
School of Business and Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.

DOI: 10.4236/jsea.2014.71002                

Abstract

Nowadays, Model Driven Development (MDD) is a powerful technique for modelling complex systems and also for aligning business and information technology (IT), giving designers the ability to execute business models as they are intended to be run and behaved in the business environment. The Object Management Group (OMG) adopted many business standards into the Model Driven Architecture (MDA) environment e.g. Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR), the Business Motivation Model (BMM), Business Process Modelling and Notation (BPMN) and Organisational Structure Model (OSM). These can work together to model different aspects of the enterprise at the business level. However, these models lack reasoning and dynamic simulation: there is no significant way to simulate discrete and continuous time system behaviour or to build arguments for reasoning about the design options within the OMG specifications. In this paper we propose an approach to overcoming this problem, by integrating a set of modelling tools into one single platform, taking advantage of meta-modelling techniques to integrate new tools with the OMG specifications in a model driven environment. The prospective framework should be able to tackle advanced analysis and design problems by intertwining design, reasoning and simulation to achieve a higher level of design maturity through implementing the desired scenario.

Keywords

Enterprise Modelling; Model Driven Development; Business Modelling; Models Integration; Complex and Dynamic Enterprise Modelling Framework

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	G. Baxter and I. Sommerville, “Socio-Technical Systems: From Design Methods to Systems Engineering. Interacting with Computers,” 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.07.003
[2]	J. D. Sterman, “Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World,” Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, 2000.
[3]	P. Loucopoulos, “The F3 (From Fuzzy to Formal) View on Requirements Engineering,” Ingénierie des Systèmes d’-Information, Vol. 2, No. 6, 1995, pp. 639-655.
[4]	J. Morabito, I. Sack and A. Bhate, “Organization Modeling: Innovative Architectures for the 21st Century,” Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, 1999.
[5]	E. S. Yu, “Social Modelling and i*. Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications,” 2009.
[6]	N. R. Terkelsen, “Architect in the Spotlight,” Interview in Journal of Enterprise Architecture, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2013, pp. 2166-6792.
[7]	P. Loucopoulos, “From Information Modelling to Enterprise Modelling. Information Systems Engineering: State of the Art and Research Themes,” In: S. Brinkkemper, E. Lindencrona and A. Solvberg, Eds., Springer, 2000, pp. 67-78.
[8]	P. J. Bowler, “Evolution: The History of an Idea,” 3rd Edition, University of California Press, 2003.
[9]	N. Nohria and R. Gulati, “What Is the Optimum Amount of Organizational Slack? A Study of the Relationship between Slack and Innovation in Multinational Firms,” European Management Journal, Vol. 15, No. 6, 1997, pp. 603-611.
[10]	D. Tapscott, “Creating Value in the Network Economy,” Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1999.
[11]	O. Pastor, S. Espa?a, J. I. Panach and N. Aquino, “Model-Driven Development,” Informatik-Spektrum, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2008, pp. 394-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00287-008-0275-8
[12]	OMG, “MDA Guide Version 1.0.1,” 2003. http://www.omg.org/mda
[13]	D. Chapin, “Business Architecture as the Application of the MDA Foundation Model to ‘Organizations’,” Presentation to Open Group Business Architecture Working Group, Glasgow, 2008.
[14]	OMG, “Business Motivation Model (BMM) 1.1,” 2010.
[15]	OMG, “Semantic of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR) 1.0,” 2008.
[16]	OMG, “Organization Structure Metamodel (OSM) 2009. Revised Submission, bmi/09-08-02,” 2009.
[17]	OMG, “Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) 2.0,” 2011.
[18]	OMG, “Unified Modeling Language (UML), Superstructure, V2.1.2,” 2007.
[19]	OMG, “Service Oriented Architecture Modeling Language (SoaML), Version 1.0.1,” 2012.
[20]	S. Kent, “Model Driven Engineering. Integrated Formal Methods”, Springer, 2002.
[21]	P. Louridas and P. Loucopoulos, “A Generic Model for Reflective Design,” ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2000, pp. 199-237. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1145/350887.350895
[22]	I. Jurisica, J. Mylopoulos and E. Yu, “Ontologies for Knowledge Management: An Information Systems,” Knowledge and Information Systems, Vol. 6, 2004, pp. 380-401.
[23]	M. Lepp?nen, “A Context-Based Enterprise Ontology. In Business Information Systems,” Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2007, pp. 273-286.
[24]	E. Kavakli and P. Loucopoulos, “Experiences with Goal-Oriented Modelling of Organisational Change,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics—Part C, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2006, pp. 221-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2004.840066
[25]	A. Fayoumi and L. Yang, “SBVR: Knowledge Definition, Vocabulary Management, and Rules Integrations,” International Journal of E-Business Development, 2012.
[26]	W. C. Regli, et al., “A Survey of Design Rationale Systems,” Springer-Verlag, 2000, pp. 209-235.
[27]	D. Karagiannis, H. G. Fill, P. Hofferer and M. Nemetz, “Metamodeleing: Some Application Areas in Information Systems. In Information Systems and e-Business Technologies,” Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 175-188.