Towards an analysis driven approach for adapting enterprise architecture languages

Enterprise Architecture (EA) modeling languages are increasingly used for various enterprise wide analyses. In most cases one needs to adapt EA languages to an appropriate level of detail. However such an adaptation is not straightforward. Language engineers currently deal with analysis driven language adaptation in an ad-hoc manner, adapting languages from scratch. This introduces various problems, such as a tendency to add uninteresting and/or unnecessary details to languages, while important enterprise details are not documented. Moreover, adding detail increases the complexity of languages, which in turn inhibits a language’s communication capabilities. Yet experience from practice shows that architects often are communicators, next to analysts. As a result, one needs to find a balance between a model’s communication and analysis capabilities. In this position paper we argue for an approach for assisting language engineers in adapting, in a controlled manner, EA languages for model-driven enterprise analyses. Furthermore, we present the key ingredients of such an approach, and use these as a starting point for a research outlook.

[1]  Marcello M. Bonsangue,et al.  A logical viewpoint on architectures , 2004 .

[2]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  The “Physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[3]  Dimitris Karagiannis,et al.  Facilitate Modelling Using Method Integration: An Approach Using Mappings and Integration Rules , 2007, ECIS.

[4]  Marten van Sinderen,et al.  A method for predicting the probability of business network profitability , 2014, Information Systems and e-Business Management.

[5]  Henry Muccini,et al.  What Industry Needs from Architectural Languages: A Survey , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

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

[7]  Henk Jonkers,et al.  The Anatomy of the ArchiMate Language , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..

[8]  Anneke Kleppe,et al.  Software Language Engineering: Creating Domain-Specific Languages Using Metamodels , 2008 .

[9]  Marc M. Lankhorst,et al.  Enterprise Architecture at Work - Modelling, Communication and Analysis, 2nd Edition , 2005, The Enterprise Engineering Series.

[10]  Heung Seok Chae,et al.  Modularization of the UML Metamodel Using Model Slicing , 2008, Fifth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations (itng 2008).

[11]  Maria-Eugenia Iacob,et al.  ArchiMate 2.0 Specification: The Open Group , 2012 .

[12]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Multi-perspective enterprise modeling (MEMO) conceptual framework and modeling languages , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[13]  Andy Schürr,et al.  Formal Definition of MOF 2.0 Metamodel Components and Composition , 2008, MoDELS.

[14]  Daniel Alami,et al.  Process Modeling Using Event-Driven Process Chains , 2016 .

[15]  Jan L. Top,et al.  Engineering ontologies , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[16]  Dimitris Karagiannis,et al.  Enterprise Model Integration , 2003, EC-Web.

[17]  Michel Riveill,et al.  Managing Model Evolution Using the CCBM Approach , 2008, 15th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems (ecbs 2008).

[18]  Dick A. C. Quartel,et al.  Application and project portfolio valuation using enterprise architecture and business requirements modelling , 2012, Enterp. Inf. Syst..

[19]  Robert Lagerström,et al.  Architecture analysis of enterprise systems modifiability - Models, analysis, and validation , 2010, J. Syst. Softw..

[20]  Robert Winter,et al.  Virtual Decoupling for IT/Business Alignment – Conceptual Foundations, Architecture Design and Implementation Example , 2009, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[21]  M Mernik,et al.  When and how to develop domain-specific languages , 2005, CSUR.

[22]  Frank S. de Boer,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Analysis with XML , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[23]  Maria-Eugenia Iacob,et al.  ArchiMate 2.0 Specification , 2012 .

[24]  Peter Loos,et al.  Understanding Understandability of Conceptual Models - What Are We Actually Talking about? , 2012, ER.

[25]  H. James Nelson,et al.  Research Review: A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of UML Models , 2011, J. Database Manag..

[26]  Mathias Ekstedt,et al.  A survey on CIO concerns-do enterprise architecture frameworks support them? , 2006, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[27]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[28]  Pierre Kelsen,et al.  A generic model decomposition technique and its application to the Eclipse modeling framework , 2015, Software & Systems Modeling.

[29]  Thomas Kühne,et al.  Matters of (Meta-) Modeling , 2006, Software & Systems Modeling.

[30]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  A Canonical Scheme for Model Composition , 2006, ECMDA-FA.

[31]  M. Wimmer,et al.  A Survey on Aspect-Oriented Modeling Approaches , 2006 .

[32]  Maria-Eugenia Iacob,et al.  Performance and Cost Analysis of Service-Oriented Enterprise Architectures , 2009 .

[33]  Jean-Marc Jézéquel,et al.  Meta-model Pruning , 2009, MoDELS.

[34]  Kurt Kosanke,et al.  CIMOSA: enterprise engineering and integration , 1999 .

[35]  Peter Loos,et al.  Understanding understandability of conceptual models - what are we actually talking about? - Supplement , 2013 .

[36]  François Vernadat,et al.  UEML: Towards a unified enterprise modelling language , 2002 .

[37]  Pierre Kelsen,et al.  A Modular Model Composition Technique , 2010, FASE.

[38]  Frederick P. Brooks,et al.  No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering , 1987 .

[39]  Hyoil Han,et al.  A survey on ontology mapping , 2006, SGMD.

[40]  John Krogstie,et al.  Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[41]  Sybren de Kinderen,et al.  Bridging value modelling to ArchiMate via transaction modelling , 2014, Software & Systems Modeling.

[42]  Martin Op't Land,et al.  Enterprise Architecture - Creating Value by Informed Governance , 2008, The Enterprise Engineering Series.

[43]  Benoît Combemale,et al.  Modeling model slicers , 2011, MODELS'11.

[44]  Eric Dubois,et al.  Enhancing the ArchiMate® standard with a responsibility modeling language for access rights management , 2012, SIN '12.