Multiperspective Evaluation of Reference Models - Towards a Framework

Within the information systems field, reference models have been known for many years. Despite the relevance of reference model quality, little research has been done on their systematic evaluation. Based on an analysis of prior work on reference model quality, we propose a framework for the multiperspective evaluation of reference models. The framework comprises 15 perspectives. Each perspective is discussed with respect to its strengths and limitations. As well, we provide examples of the types of research that have already been undertaken on each perspective.

[1]  Christiane Floyd,et al.  Software Development and Reality Construction , 1992 .

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

[3]  Linda Rising,et al.  The Pattern Almanac , 2000 .

[4]  KleinMark,et al.  Tools for Inventing Organizations , 1999 .

[5]  Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau,et al.  Conceptual Modeling — ER ’99: 18th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling Paris, France, November 15–18, 1999 Proceedings , 1999, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  Linda Rising,et al.  The Pattern Almanac 2000 , 2000 .

[7]  Pieter Wisse,et al.  Metapattern: Context and Time in Information Models , 2000 .

[8]  Peter Loos,et al.  Ontological Evaluation of Reference Models Using the Bunge-Wand-Weber Model , 2003, AMCIS.

[9]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Towards a New Understanding of Data Modelling , 1992 .

[10]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes , 1999 .

[11]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Improving the Quality of Entity Relationship Models: An Action Research Programme , 1998, Aust. Comput. J..

[12]  Jörg Becker,et al.  Process Management , 2003 .

[13]  August-Wilhelm Scheer,et al.  ARIS Architecture and Reference Models for Business Process Management , 2000, Business Process Management.

[14]  Tok Wang Ling,et al.  Conceptual Modeling – ER ’98 , 1998, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[15]  Vojislav B. Misic,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Reference Models , 2000, ER.

[16]  Young-Gul Kim,et al.  Comparing data modeling formalisms , 1995, CACM.

[17]  Arne Sølvberg,et al.  Understanding quality in conceptual modeling , 1994, IEEE Software.

[18]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  Conceptual Modeling — ER 2000 , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[19]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Information systems development and data modelling: conceptual and philosophical foundations , 1995 .

[20]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software , 2001 .

[21]  Yair Wand,et al.  Theoretical foundations for conceptual modelling in information systems development , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[22]  Simon K. Milton,et al.  Ontological Foundations of Data Modeling In Information Systems , 2000 .

[23]  M. zur Muhlen.  Evaluation of workflow management systems using meta models , 1999 .

[24]  Keng Siau,et al.  Evaluation of information modeling methods-a review , 1998, Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[25]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Ontological Evaluation of the UML Using the Bunge–Wand–Weber Model , 2002, Software and Systems Modeling.

[26]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Toward a handbook of organizational processes , 2000 .

[27]  Peter Bernus,et al.  Handbook on Architectures of Information Systems , 1999 .

[28]  Walter F. Tichy,et al.  A Controlled Experiment in Maintenance Comparing Design Patterns to Simpler Solutions , 2001, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[29]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Information Modeling in the Time of the Revolution , 1998, Inf. Syst..

[30]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Conceptual Modelling as the Core of the Information Systems Discipline - Perspectives and Epistemological Challenges , 1999 .

[31]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Metrics for Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models , 1998, ER.

[32]  Nito Mitra,et al.  Reference model , 1992 .

[33]  Ron Weber,et al.  Are Attributes Entities? A Study of Database Designers' Memory Structures , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[34]  Keng Siau.  L.E.O.: The Incredible Story of the World's First Business Computer , 1997 .

[35]  Joachim Schelp,et al.  Qualität von Datenmodellen , 2000 .

[36]  August-Wilhelm Scheer,et al.  Extending data modeling to cover the whole enterprise , 1992, CACM.

[37]  Jinwoo Kim,et al.  How Do We Understand a System with (So) Many Diagrams? Cognitive Integration Processes in Diagrammatic Reasoning , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[38]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1 , 1993 .

[39]  Ron Weber,et al.  Should Optional Properties Be Used in Conceptual Modelling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[40]  Ron Weber,et al.  Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling - A Research Agenda , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[41]  Peter Loos,et al.  Classification of reference models: a methodology and its application , 2003, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[42]  Peter Meso,et al.  How Good Are These UML Diagrams? An Empirical Test of the Wand and Weber Good Decomposition Model , 2002, ICIS.

[43]  Reinhard Schütte,et al.  The Guidelines of Modeling - An Approach to Enhance the Quality in Information Models , 1998, ER.