Quality of Interactive Models

Interactive models have been proposed as a general technique for increasing the flexibility of computerised information systems. Interactive models are first made during development, but are also available for manipulation by the users at run-time, and the model contents influence the behaviour of the system. Such models are more immersed in day-to-day work activities than the models conventionally developed during software development. Consequently, they face stronger requirements, particularly regarding comprehensibility, simplicity and flexibility. A comprehensive overview and classification of these requirements is currently lacking in the literature on interactive models. We have earlier developed a framework for understanding and assessing the quality of models in general, with emphasis on conceptual models. The framework has earlier been specialised in several directions, but primarily for passive models such as enterprise and requirements models. In this paper we extend our quality framework towards assessing interactive models. These extensions are based on our experiences from implementing interactive modelling languages and support systems. Whereas parts of the framework can be used as originally defined, other areas give quite different results due to the much tighter interplay between model changes and domain changes than what is found when using traditional modelling and system development approaches. This results in a useful deepening of our framework, and improvement of its practical applicability for understanding the quality of interactive models.

[1]  John Krogstie,et al.  Information Systems Engineering: Conceptual Modeling in a quality perspective , 2003 .

[2]  John Krogstie,et al.  Defining quality aspects for conceptual models , 1995, ISCO.

[3]  Reinhard Schütte,et al.  Architectures for Evaluating the Quality of Information Models - a Meta and an Object Level Comparison , 1999, ER.

[4]  Eckhard D. Falkenberg,et al.  On a framework of information systems concepts , 1990 .

[5]  Yan Jin,et al.  The Virtual Design Team: A Computational Simulation Model of Project Organizations1 , 1998 .

[6]  Bo Dahlbom.  The Idea that Reality is Socially Constructed , 1992 .

[7]  野中 郁次郎,et al.  The Knowledge-Creating Company: How , 1995 .

[8]  Guttorm Sindre,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework , 2002, ER.

[9]  Steinar Carlsen,et al.  Organizational metaphors as lenses for analyzing workflow technology , 1997, GROUP.

[10]  John Krogstie,et al.  A Semiotic Approach to Quality in Requirements Specifications , 2001, Organizational Semiotics.

[11]  John Krogstie,et al.  Using a Semiotic Framework to Evaluate UML for the Development of Models of High Quality , 2001, Unified Modeling Language: Systems Analysis, Design and Development Issues.

[12]  Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi,et al.  P ERSPECTIVE M AKING AND P ERSPECTIVE T AKING IN C OMMUNITIES OF K NOWING , 2000 .

[13]  Babak A. Farshchian,et al.  Gossip: An Awareness Engine for Increasing Product Awareness in Distributed Development Projects , 2000, CAiSE.

[14]  Vincenzo Gervasi,et al.  Achieving quality in natural language requirements , 1998 .

[15]  Peter Wegner,et al.  Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms , 1997, CACM.

[16]  Bernhard Thalheim,et al.  Future Directions of Conceptual Modeling , 1997, Conceptual Modeling.

[17]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Improving the quality of data models: empirical validation of a quality management framework , 2003, Inf. Syst..

[18]  Alex Voss,et al.  Innovation in use: Interleaving day-to-day operation and systems development , 2000 .

[19]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective , 1978 .

[20]  S. Carlsen.  Action Port Model: a mixed paradigm conceptual workflow modeling language , 1998, Proceedings. 3rd IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (Cat. No.98EX122).

[21]  Ikujiro Nonaka,et al.  Theory of Organisational Knowledge Creation”. Organisation Science. , 1994 .

[22]  Bart-Jan Hommes,et al.  The Quality of Business Process Modelling Methods , 2000 .

[23]  Eckhard D. Falkenberg,et al.  FRISCO: A framework of information system concepts : The FRISCO report (WEB edition) , 1998 .

[24]  Steinar Carlsen,et al.  Conceptual Modeling and Composition of Flexible Workflow Models , 1997 .

[25]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Growing systems in emergent organizations , 1999, CACM.

[26]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[27]  Raymond E. Levitt,et al.  The virtual design team , 1998, CACM.

[28]  John Krogstie,et al.  Utilizing Active Knowledge Models in an Infrastructure for Virtual Enterprises , 2002, PRO-VE.

[29]  Guttorm Sindre,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Process Models : Empirical Analysis of a Quality Framework , 2022 .

[30]  D. L. Gorlée.  Handbook of Semiotics , 1997, English and American Studies in German.

[31]  Peter Wegner,et al.  Interaction as a Framework for Modeling , 1997, Conceptual Modeling.

[32]  John Krogstie,et al.  Active Knowledge Models for supporting eWork and eBusiness , 2002 .

[33]  Jon Atle Gulla,et al.  Semantically Accessing Documents Using Conceptual Model Descriptions , 1999, ER.

[34]  P. Berger,et al.  The Social Construction of Reality , 1966 .

[35]  Håvard D. Jørgensen.  Interaction as a framework for flexible workflow modelling , 2001, GROUP '01.

[36]  Weigang Wang,et al.  Flexible support for business processes: extending cooperative hypermedia with process support , 1999, Inf. Softw. Technol..