Exchange Communication Point Modeling in the context of the Enterprise Architecture

It is important to understand the performance and operation of an Internet Exchange Point to improve the management, and to reduce the cost associated with implementation and the information shared. Enterprise Architecture supports the design of systems, according to the business domain processes, network infrastructure and all the different applications running. Existing Enterprise Architecture modelling languages only provide a general concept of a network and do not represent specific information such as the protocols used, the internet protocols or the network addresses used for sharing information. This paper proposes a set of new concepts and attributes to the technology layer of reference language (ArchiMate) to enhance the representation and management of the network infrastructure. The ArchiMate language extensions are then used in modelling two Case Studies of Internet Exchange Point implementation in the Portuguese Public Administration. It was possible to compute which services will have impact in case of failure

Modeling BDN framework in ArchiMate: benefits management of IS investments applied in the context of media and television industry digital transformation

O alinhamento entre os investimentos em Tecnologia da Informação (TI) e a definição ao dos objetivos de negócios e recorrentemente referido na literatura como uma tarefa primordial com impacto direto no lucro da organização. A Arquitetura Corporativa (EA) desempenha um papel importante na descrição das dependências entre um roteiro de migração ao de TI e as contra- partes de negócios, portanto, facilitando as decisões das partes interessadas. No entanto, as evidencias mostram que um número significativo de projetos de TI não consegue entregar os resultados desejados. Normalmente, as causas do fracasso incluem (i) a predominância de abordagens de gestão financeira de caixa preta que oferecem indicadores fracos, empheg, retorno sobre o investimento ou redução de custos, e (ii) não identificar os benefícios de negócios reais fornecidos pelo valor que pode ser gerado por um investimento em TI. Este artigo usa ArchiMate para propor um modelo para entender, projetar e gerenciar os benefícios do negocio. ArchiMate permite, entre outros, modelar camadas de negócios, aplicativos, tecnologia ou estratégia e agora é estendido com benefícios de negócios. Especificamente, é apresentado um ponto de vista da ArchiMate baseado no modelo Benefit Dependence Network (BDN). O objetivo dessa visão é apoiar os stakeholders que estão ao gerenciando os benefícios a serem alcançados por um investimento em TI. A solução conceitual e discutida e demonstrada no contexto do caso de uso da industria de televisão ao e vídeo de mídia. Posteriormente, as deficiências ontológicas desse modelo s ´ ao discutidas utilizando o método Wand Weber e por meio de entrevistas com especialistas.The alignment between Information Technologies (IT) investments and business objectives definition is recurrently referred in the literature as a paramount task owning a direct impact on the organization’s profit. Enterprise Architecture (EA) plays an important role in describing the dependencies between an IT migration roadmap and business counterparts, therefore, facilitating the stakeholder’s decisions. However, evidence shows that a significant number of IT projects fail to deliver the desired outcomes. Usually, the failure causes are (i) the dominance of blackbox financial management approaches offering poor indicators, e.g., return-on-investment or cost reduction, and (ii) not identifying the real business benefits provided by the value that can be generated by an IT investment. This paper uses ArchiMate to propose a model to understand, design, and manage the business benefits. ArchiMate enables, among others, to model business, application, technology, or strategy layers and is now extended with business benefits. In specific, an ArchiMate viewpoint based on the Benefits Dependency Network (BDN) model is presented. The purpose of this viewpoint is to support the stakeholders that are managing the benefits to be achieved by an IT investment. The conceptual solution is argued and demonstrated in the context of the media video and television industry use case. Afterward, the ontological deficiencies of this model are discussed using the Wand Weber method and through interviews with experts

Enterprise Modeling in the context of Enterprise Engineering: State of the art and outlook

[EN] Enterprise Modeling is a central activity in Enterprise Engineering and can facilitate Production Management activities. This state-of-the-art paper first recalls definitions and fundamental principles of enterprise modelling, which goes far beyond process modeling. The CIMOSA modeling framework, which is based on an event-driven process-based modeling language suitable for enterprise system analysis and model enactment, is used as a reference conceptual framework because of its generality. Next, the focus is on new features of enterprise modeling languages including risk, value, competency modeling and service orientation. Extensions for modeling collaborative aspects of networked organizations are suggested as research outlook. Major approaches used in enterprise modeling are recalled before concluding.Vernadat, F. (2014). Enterprise Modeling in the context of Enterprise Engineering: State of the art and outlook. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering. 2(2):57-73. doi:10.4995/ijpme.2014.2326SWORD577322AMICE. (1993). CIMOSA: Open System Architecture for CIM, 2nd revised and extended edition. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 234 pages.Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2007). A comprehensive modeling framework for collaborative networked organizations. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(5), 529-542. doi:10.1007/s10845-007-0063-3Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Afsarmanesh, H., Galeano, N., & Molina, A. (2009). Collaborative networked organizations – Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57(1), 46-60. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2008.11.024Chakravarthy, S. (1989). Rule management and evaluation: an active DBMS perspective. ACM SIGMOD Record, 18(3), 20-28. doi:10.1145/71031.71034Chen, H. (2010). Editorial. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 1(1), 1-5. doi:10.1145/1877725.1877726Clivillé, V., Berrah, L., & Mauris, G. (2007). Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the MACBETH multi-criteria method. International Journal of Production Economics, 105(1), 171-189. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.03.002Curtis, B., Kellner, M. I., & Over, J. (1992). Process modeling. Communications of the ACM, 35(9), 75-90. doi:10.1145/130994.130998Dalal, N. P., Kamath, M., Kolarik, W. J., & Sivaraman, E. (2004). Toward an integrated framework for modeling enterprise processes. Communications of the ACM, 47(3), 83-87. doi:10.1145/971617.971620Doumeingts, G., & Vallespir, B. (1995). A methodology supporting design and implementation of CIM systems including economic evaluation. In P. Brandimarte & A. Villa, Eds. Optimization Models and Concepts in Produc-tion Management (pp. 307-331). New-York, NY: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.Doumeingts, G., & Ducq, Y. (2001). Enterprise modelling techniques to improve efficiency of enterprises. Production Planning & Control, 12(2), 146-163. doi:10.1080/09537280150501257Harzallah, M., Berio, G., & Vernadat, F. (2006). Analysis and modeling of individual competencies: toward better management of human resources. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 36(1), 187-207. doi:10.1109/tsmca.2005.859093Jagdev, H. S., & Thoben, K.-D. (2001). Anatomy of enterprise collaborations. Production Planning & Control, 12(5), 437-451. doi:10.1080/09537280110042675JORYSZ, H. R., & VERNADAT, F. B. (1990). CIM-OSA Part 1: total enterprise modelling and function view. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 3(3-4), 144-156. doi:10.1080/09511929008944444Khalaf, R., Curbera, F., Nagy, W.A., Mukhi, N., Tai, S., & Duftler, M. (2005). Understanding Web Services. In M. Singh, Ed. Practical Handbook of Internet Computing (Chap. 27). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.Kosanke, K., & Nell, J. G. (Eds.). (1997). Enterprise Engineering and Integration. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-60889-6Kosanke, K., Vernadat, F.B., & Zelm, M. (2014). Means to enable Enterprise Interoperation: CIMOSA Object Capa-bility Profiles and CIMOSA Collaboration View, Proc. of the 19th World Congress of the IFAC, Cape Town, South Africa, 24-19 August 2014.Larson, N., & Kusiak, A. (1996). Managing design processes: a risk assessment approach. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 26(6), 749-759. doi:10.1109/3468.541335Li, Q., Wang, Z., Li, W., Li, J., Wang, C., & Du, R. (2013). Applications integration in a hybrid cloud computing environment: modelling and platform. Enterprise Information Systems, 7(3), 237-271. doi:10.1080/17517575.2012.677479Owen, S., & Walker, Z. (2013). Enterprise Modelling and Architecture. New Dehli, India: Ocean Media Pvt. Ltd.Roboam, M., Zanettin, M., & Pun, L. (1989). GRAI-IDEF0-Merise (GIM): Integrated methodology to analyse and design manufacturing systems. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 2(2), 82-98. doi:10.1016/0951-5240(89)90021-9Ross, D. T., & Schoman, K. E. (1977). Structured Analysis for Requirements Definition. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-3(1), 6-15. doi:10.1109/tse.1977.229899Shah, L.A., Etienne, A., Siadat, A., & Vernadat, F. (2014). Decision-making in the manufacturing environment using a value-risk graph. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 25, 2.Scheer, A.-W. (1992). Architecture of Integrated Information Systems. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-97389-5Scheer, A.-W. (1999). ARIS — Business Process Modeling. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-97998-9Vernadat, F.B. (1996). Enterprise Modeling and Integration: Principles and Applications. London: Chapman & Hall. 528 pages.Vernadat, F. B. (2007). Interoperable enterprise systems: Principles, concepts, and methods. Annual Reviews in Control, 31(1), 137-145. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2007.03.00

Re-thinking software engineering approaches : a critical reflection on theory building.

This paper re-appraises Peter Naur's influential paper on Programming as Theory Building in the context of modern software engineering practice. The central argument is that such practice is focussed primarily on methods, notations, lifecycles and the description of artifacts such as models. Instead we propose that a theory building view is more appropriate, and that the concept of a theory should underpin a software design process which then calls for new tools and a new research agenda