Enterprise Modelling Languages - Just Enough Standardisation?

In enterprise modelling, a wide range of models and languages is used to support different purposes. If left uncontrolled, this variety of models and languages can easily result in fragmented perspective on an enterprise, its processes and IT support. A traditional approach to address this problem is to create standard modelling languages that unify and integrate different modelling perspectives, such as e.g. UML, BPMN, and ArchiMate. However, one can observe how, in actual use, the ‘standardising’ and ‘integrating’ effect of these languages erodes. This is typically manifested by the emergence of ‘variants’, ‘light weight versions’, and extensions of the standard dealing with ‘missing aspects’. The empirical data suggests that these ‘variants’ emerge to compensate the inability of a standard language to aptly fit the needs of specific modelling situations. In this paper, we reconsider the drivers and strategies of modelling language standardisation. Relying on an ongoing research, the paper develops a fundamental understanding of the role of fixed language in the context of conceptual and enterprise modelling. This understanding is then used to analyse the ‘variants’ in the actual use of a standard process modelling language, and to discuss the potential insights towards its standardisation strategy.

[1]  Manfred Reichert,et al.  Making the case for measuring mental effort , 2012, EESSMod '12.

[2]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  On the Suitability of BPMN for Business Process Modelling , 2006, Business Process Management.

[3]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  A Fundamental View on the Process of Conceptual Modeling , 2005, ER.

[4]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Cognitive Mechanisms of Conceptual Modelling - How Do People Do It? , 2013, ER.

[5]  H. H. Clark.  Arenas of language use , 1993 .

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

[7]  Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle,et al.  SBPMN - An easier business process modeling notation for business users , 2010, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[8]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Cognitive Load Effects on End User Understanding of Conceptual Models: An Experimental Analysis , 2004, ADBIS.

[9]  Jan Recker,et al.  How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation , 2008, CAiSE.

[10]  T. Rohrer.  Embodiment and Experientialism , 2010 .

[11]  Bernhard Thalheim,et al.  Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics of Conceptual Modelling , 2012, NLDB.

[12]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[13]  Jaap Gordijn,et al.  Modeling Strategic Partnerships Using the E3value Ontology: A Field Study in the Banking Industry , 2007 .

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

[15]  Marta Indulska,et al.  How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? , 2006, Data Knowl. Eng..

[16]  Bernhard Thalheim,et al.  The Theory of Conceptual Models, the Theory of Conceptual Modelling and Foundations of Conceptual Modelling , 2011, Handbook of Conceptual Modeling.

[17]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Freezing language : conceptualisation processes across ICT-supported organisations , 2003 .

[18]  Yvon Kermarrec,et al.  Telecommunications Service Creation: Towards Extensions for Enterprise Architecture Modeling Languages , 2011, ICSOFT.

[19]  S.J.B.A. Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Navigating the Methodology Jungle - The communicative role of modelling techniques in information system development , 2005 .

[20]  Sybren de Kinderen,et al.  Integrating Value Modelling into ArchiMate , 2012, IESS.

[21]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  On Utility-based Selection of Architecture-Modelling Concepts , 2005, APCCM.

[22]  Patrick Valduriez,et al.  Towards the efficient development of model transformations using model weaving and matching transformations , 2009, Software & Systems Modeling.

[23]  Jan Recker,et al.  Opportunities and constraints: the current struggle with BPMN , 2010, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[24]  Mourad Debbabi,et al.  Systems Modeling Language , 2010 .

[25]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Understanding the Requirements on Modelling Techniques , 2005, CAiSE.

[26]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Some Guidelines for the Conception of Domain-Specific Modelling Languages , 2011, EMISA.

[27]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Meaningful modeling: what's the semantics of "semantics"? , 2004, Computer.

[28]  Olga Petrovna Fesenko.  Structure of Linguistic Personality in the Aspect of the Center-Periphery Theory , 2013 .

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

[30]  Giuseppe Berio,et al.  An ontology for enterprise and information systems modelling , 2012, Appl. Ontology.

[31]  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.

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

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

[34]  Kecheng Liu,et al.  Understanding the roles of signs and norms in organizations - a semiotic approach to information systems design , 2000, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[35]  Michael zur Muehlen,et al.  Service Process Innovation: A Case Study of BPMN in Practice , 2008, Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008).

[36]  Maria Bannert,et al.  Managing Cognitive Load--Recent Trends in Cognitive Load Theory. Commentary. , 2002 .

[37]  Marija Bjekovic,et al.  A Framework for Natural Enterprise Modelling , 2013, 2013 IEEE 15th Conference on Business Informatics.

[38]  Eric S. K. Yu,et al.  Modeling Knowledge Transfer in a Software Maintenance Organization - An Experience Report and Critical Analysis , 2008, PoEM.

[39]  Dirk van der Linden,et al.  Beyond terminologies: Using psychometrics to validate shared ontologies , 2012, Appl. Ontology.

[40]  D. Cruse,et al.  Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics , 2000 .

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

[42]  Hubert Cuyckens,et al.  The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics , 2010 .

[43]  Jeff Rothenberg,et al.  The nature of modeling , 1989 .

[44]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Concepts and Strategies for Quality of Modeling , 2009, Innovations in Information Systems Modeling.

[45]  Janis A. Bubenko,et al.  An Intentional Perspective on Enterprise Modeling , 2010, Intentional Perspectives on Information Systems Engineering.

[46]  Jens Allwood,et al.  Some remarks on the relationship between the semantic and the pragmatic web , 2008, ICPW '08.

[47]  A. Baddeley.  Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. , 2012, Annual review of psychology.

[48]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Focused Conceptualisation: Framing Questioning and Answering in Model-Oriented Dialogue Games , 2010, PoEM.

[49]  Harold Ossher,et al.  Insights into enterprise conceptual modeling , 2010, Data Knowl. Eng..

[50]  Anniken Karlsen.  Enterprise Modeling Practice in ICT-Enabled Process Change , 2011, PoEM.