Intentional Modeling for Problem Solving in Enterprise Architecture

Sagar Sunkle, Vinay Kulkarni, Suman Roychoudhury

Abstract

Taking and executing correct decisions is critical in enterprise systems which are characterized by rapid changes along interconnected dimensions. Enterprise architecture (EA) frameworks offer holistic treatment of enterprise systems but constitute only one part of the solution to problems arising due to organizational changes. The other, less explored part is the ability to explicate and analyze the intentions behind major decisions. We investigate a step-by-step approach where intentional modeling is treated as a problem solving technique. In our approach, an intentional model devoid of goals is obtained from the existing EA model via mapping. It is expanded by representing the problems due to organizational changes as goals and soft goals and alternative solutions to them. The final intentional model is transformed back to an actionable EA model via the same mapping. In the case study, we re-imagine the evolution of our model-driven software development unit as an enterprise where two stages in its evolution are treated as as-is and to-be states and the journey is captured in terms of intentional models. Initial explorations suggest that the mapping enables a clear path from as-is to to-be states of an EA model while preserving the reasoning behind every alternative chosen.

References

  1. Ayala, C. P., Cares, C., Carvallo, J. P., Grau, G., Haya, M., Salazar, G., Franch, X., Mayol, E., and Quer, C. (2005). A comparative analysis of i*-based agentoriented modeling languages. In Chu, W. C., Juzgado, N. J., and Wong, W. E., editors, SEKE, pages 43-50.
  2. Berrisford, G. and Lankhorst, M. (2009). Using archimate with an architecture method. Via Nova Architectura.
  3. Buchanan, R. and Soley, R. (2002). Aligning enterprise architecture and it investments with corporate goals. OMG Whitepaper, Object Management Group, Needham.
  4. S. K., editors (2011). Proceedings of the 5th Interna-
  5. tional i* Workshop 2011, Trento, Italy, August 28-29, 2011, volume 766 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings.
  6. Engelsman, W., Quartel, D. A. C., Jonkers, H., and van Sinderen, M. (2011). Extending enterprise architecture modelling with business goals and requirements. Enterprise IS, 5(1):9-36.
  7. Haren, V. and Publishing, V. H. (2012). ArchiMate 2. 0 Specification. Van Haren Publishing Series. Bernan Assoc.
  8. Horkoff, J. and Yu, E. S. K. (2009). Evaluating goal achievement in enterprise modeling - an interactive procedure and experiences. In Persson, A. and Stirna, J., editors, PoEM, volume 39 of Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 145-160.
  9. Horkoff, J., Yu, Y., and Yu, E. S. K. (2011). OpenOME: An open-source goal and agent-oriented model drawing and analysis tool. In (de Castro et al., 2011), pages 154-156.
  10. Kulkarni, V. and Reddy, S. (2003). Separation of concerns in model-driven development. IEEE Software, 20(5):64-69.
  11. Kulkarni, V., Reddy, S., and Rajbhoj, A. (2010). Scaling up model driven engineering - experience and lessons learnt. In Petriu, D. C., Rouquette, N., and Haugen, Ø., editors, MoDELS (2), volume 6395 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 331-345. Springer.
  12. López, L., Franch, X., and Marco, J. (2011). Making explicit some implicit i* language decisions. In Jeusfeld, M. A., Delcambre, L. M. L., and Ling, T. W., editors, ER, volume 6998 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 62-77. Springer.
  13. OMG (2010). Business Motivation Model - Version 1.1.
  14. Quartel, D. A. C., Engelsman, W., Jonkers, H., and van Sinderen, M. (2009). A goal-oriented requirements modelling language for enterprise architecture. In EDOC, pages 3-13. IEEE Computer Society.
  15. Sunkle, S., Kulkarni, V., and Roychoudhury, S. (2013). Analyzable enterprise models using ontology. In Proc. CAiSE Forum. Accepted.
  16. Wagter, R., Proper, E., and Witte, D. (2012). A practicebased framework for enterprise coherence. In Proper, E., Gaaloul, K., Harmsen, F., and Wrycza, S., editors, PRET, volume 120 of Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 77-95. Springer.
  17. Yu, E. S. K. and Mylopoulos, J. (1994). Understanding “why” in software process modelling, analysis, and design. In Fadini, B., editor, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 159-168, Sorrento, Italy. IEEE Computer Society Press.
  18. Yu, E. S. K., Strohmaier, M., and Deng, X. (2006). Exploring intentional modeling and analysis for enterprise architecture. In Tenth IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC) Workshops, page 32.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Sunkle S., Kulkarni V. and Roychoudhury S. (2013). Intentional Modeling for Problem Solving in Enterprise Architecture . In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS, ISBN 978-989-8565-61-7, pages 267-274. DOI: 10.5220/0004435502670274


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis13,
author={Sagar Sunkle and Vinay Kulkarni and Suman Roychoudhury},
title={Intentional Modeling for Problem Solving in Enterprise Architecture},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,},
year={2013},
pages={267-274},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004435502670274},
isbn={978-989-8565-61-7},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,
TI - Intentional Modeling for Problem Solving in Enterprise Architecture
SN - 978-989-8565-61-7
AU - Sunkle S.
AU - Kulkarni V.
AU - Roychoudhury S.
PY - 2013
SP - 267
EP - 274
DO - 10.5220/0004435502670274