Enterprise modeling using the foundation concepts of the RM-ODP ISO/ITU standard

Enterprise architecture (EA) projects require analyzing and designing across the whole enterprise and its environment. Enterprise architects, therefore, frequently develop enterprise models that span from the markets in which the organization operates down to the implementation of the IT systems that support its operations. In this paper, we present SEAM for EA: a method for defining an enterprise model in which all the systems are systematically represented with the same modeling ontology. We base our modeling ontology on the foundation modeling concepts defined in Part 2 of ISO/ITU Standard "Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing” (RM-ODP). This work has two contributions to enterprise architecture: the SEAM for EA method itself and the use of Part 2 of the RM-ODP standard as a modeling ontolog

Business and IT Design with SEAM: An Illustration with the PhD Hiring Process at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne

Companies seek to align their business with their IT. This alignment is important to maximize the return on their IT investment in their business. One major challenge is to develop models that can be understood by both business and IT stakeholders. Without such models, it is difficult for stakeholders to reach a shared understanding and to agree on what the issues and solutions are. We present a method called SEAM: it uses a systemic approach for representing business and IT organizations. With SEAM, stakeholders can quickly develop an understanding of the problem and gain knowledge on how to address it. This improves the success rate of business and IT projects

Problem Structuring Methods in System Dynamics Modeling-A Cognitive Fit Perspective

The knowledge residing in the mental models of clients and stakeholders is considered as a crucial source of information by system dynamicists. Despite the importance of this knowledge, the theory of SD does not provide practical means for eliciting and recording it. Thus, several methods known as problem structuring methods (PSMs) have been developed and employed in the SD community to facilitate the problem situation conceptualization in group model building (GMB). Despite the growing body of literature on the application of the PSMs, limited work has been done on assessing and comparing the relative usefulness of PSMs in terms of their potential impact on problem-solving performance. In this paper, by invoking Cognitive Fit Theory, we develop a set of propositions for the analysis of the impact of PSMs on problem-solving performance

Requirements modeling in SEAM: The example of a car crash management system

This paper presents how business and IT requirements are captured with the Systemic Enterprise Architecture Methodology (SEAM). The method is applied to the Car Crash Management System (CMS) - Software Product Line (SPL) case study. The existing business situation is analyzed. We identify the problems and list relevant solutions. We select one of these solutions for which we define the business and the IT requirements. We then present the two components of SEAM used in this paper, goal-belief and behavior modeling. We end the paper by presenting the systemic foundations of SEAM

Augmenting the Zachman Enterprise Architecture Framework with a Systemic Conceptualization

The Zachman Framework offers a classification of the models created in an enterprise architecture project. These models form a holistic representation of the organization. Despite the prominent position of the Framework, there is little information publicly available to help designers create exact models that fit each other. In this paper, we propose a conceptualization based on General Systems Thinking. Our conceptualization provides concrete guidelines for creating the models required by the Framework. The proposed conceptualization establishes a better understanding of the models and of their relationships. This facilitates the creation and interpretation of the models. It also improves the traceability between them. We illustrate our approach with the results of a case study

A Framework to Model and Analyze the WHY and the HOW of Coopetition

Coopetition has been defined as an approach to managing that combines competition and cooperation. It transcends the traditional paradigms of competition and cooperation in an effort to achieve the advantages of both. As an inter-organizational relationship that is of a higher complexity than either simple competition or cooperation, coopetition presents both conceptual and practical challenges for business managers and researchers in the strategy field. In this paper we present a systemic approach to modeling coopetition between firms that provides a methodology for analyzing the strategic incentives for enterprises to engage in coopetition relationships and the organization design required to address the complexities inherent in such multi-faceted relationships. Our approach comprises a modeling technique called Systemic Enterprise Architecture Method (SEAM) that incorporates important conceptualizations adapted from competence based management (CBM) theory. We illustrate our approach by applying it to the case coopetition between IBM and Apple in the development of PowerPC CPU

Experiential learning approach for requirements engineering education

The use of requirements engineering (RE) in industry is hampered by a poor understanding of its practices and their benefits. Teaching RE at the university level is therefore an important endeavor. Shortly before students become engineers and enter the workforce, this education could ideally be provided as an integrated part of developing the requisite business skills for understanding RE. Because much social wisdom is packed into RE methods, it is unrealistic to expect students with little organizational experience to understand and appreciate this body of knowledge; hence, the necessity of an experiential approach. The course described in this paper uses an active, affective, experiential pedagogy giving students the opportunity to experience a simulated work environment that demonstrates the social/design–problemcomplexities and richness of a development organization in the throes of creating a new product. Emotional and technical debriefing is conducted after each meaningful experience so that students and faculty, alike can better understand the professional relevancies of what they have just experienced. This includes an examination of the many forces encountered in industrial settings but not normally discussed in academic settings. The course uses a low-tech social simulation, rather than software simulation, so that students learn through interaction with real people, and are therefore confronted with the complexity of true social relationships