Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Formal Descriptions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Situational Method Engineering

  • 888 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we look at formal ways of addressing situational method engineering, method parts (fragments, chunks, components, etc.) and method construction. In Sect. 4.1 we discuss various metamodelling approaches at a variety of scales, from full method to single fragment descriptions. Section 4.2 is a brief discussion on ontologies and the use proposed for these in SME. In Sect. 4.3, in contrast to the static models of Sect. 4.1, we outline several formal descriptions of ways of constructing methods, while in Sect. 4.4 we comment on a few other formal approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Nijssen’s Information Analysis Methodology (later renamed Natural language Information Analysis Method).

  2. 2.

    Meta object facility.

  3. 3.

    Common Object Methodology Metamodel Architecture.

  4. 4.

    We acknowledge contributions of Dr. Fredrik Karlsson to this section.

  5. 5.

    According to our discussion in Sect. 1.3 these should really be called process models. Here we keep the nomenclature adopted by these specific authors in order to link back to the source articles.

  6. 6.

    Enterprise Resource Planning.

References

  • Ågerfalk PJ (2006) Towards better understanding of agile values in global software development. In: Krogstie J, Halpin TA, Proper HA (eds) Proceedings of the workshop on exploring modeling methods for systems analysis and design (EMMSAD ’06), held in conjunction with the 18th conference on advanced information systems (CAiSE ’06), Luxembourg, Luxembourg. Namur University Press, Namur, pp 375–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Ågerfalk PJ, Åhlgren K (1999) Modelling the rationale of methods. In: Khosrowpour M (ed) Managing information technology resources in organizations in the next millennium. Proceedings of the 10th information resources management association international conference. IDEA Group, Hershey, PA, pp 184–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Ågerfalk P, Fitzgerald B (2006) Exploring the concept of method rationale: a conceptual tool for method tailoring. In: Siau K (ed) Advanced topics in database research, vol 5. IGI, Hershey, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ågerfalk PJ, Wistrand K (2003) Systems development method rationale: a conceptual framework for analysis. Paper presented at the 5th international conference on enterprise information systems (ICEIS 2003), 23–26 April 2003, Angers, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Ågerfalk PJ, Brinkkemper S, Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B, Karlsson F, Kelly S, Ralyté J (2007) Modularization constructs in method engineering: towards common ground? In: Ralyté J, Brinkkemper S, Henderson-Sellers B (eds) Situational method engineering: fundamentals and experiences. Springer, New York, NY, pp 359–368

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Araujo T, Rossi M (1993) Process models for CASE shell environments. In: Brinkkemper S, Harmsen F (eds) Proceedings of the fourth workshop on the next generation of CASE tools. Memoranda Informatica 93.3, Universiteit Twente, pp 90–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Aßmann U, Zschaler S, Wagner G (2006) Ontologies, meta-models, and the model-driven paradigm. In: Calero C, Ruiz F, Piattini M (eds) Ontologies for software engineering and software technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 249–273

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson C (1997) Metamodelling for distributed object environments. First international enterprise distributed object computing workshop (EDOC ’97), Brisbane, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson C (1999) Supporting and applying the UML conceptual framework. In: Bézivin J, Muller P-A (eds) «UML» 1998: beyond the notation, vol 1618. Springer, Berlin, pp 21–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson C, Kühne T (2001b) Processes and products in a multi-level metamodeling architecture. Int J Software Eng Knowl Eng 11(6):761–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson C, Gutheil M, Kiko K (2006) On the relationship of ontologies and models, in meta-modelling and ontologies. Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on meta-modelling, WoMM 2006, LNI, vol P-96, pp 47–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson C, Kennel B, Goß B (2010) The level-agnostic modeling language. In: Malloy B, Staab S, van den Brand M (eds) SLE 2010. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 6563. Springer, Berlin, pp 266–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck K (2000) Extreme programming explained. Embrace change. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, p 190

    Google Scholar 

  • Beydoun G, Low G, Tran N, Henderson-Sellers B (2005) Preliminary basis for an ontology-based methodological approach for multi-agent systems. In: Akoka J, Liddle SW, Song I-Y, Bertolotto M, Comyn-Wattiau I, van den Heuvel W-J, Kolp M, Trujillo J, Kop C, Mayr HC (eds) Proceedings of the perspectives in conceptual modeling: ER2005 workshops CAOIS, BP-UML, CoMoGIS, eCOMO and QoIS, Klagenfurt, Austria, 24–28 October 2005. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3770. Springer, Berlin, pp 131–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Beydoun G, Tran N, Low G, Henderson-Sellers B (2006) Foundations of ontology-based methodologies for multi-agent systems. In: Kolp M, Bresciani P, Henderson-Sellers B, Winikoff M (eds) Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3529. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Bézivin J, Gerbé O (2001) Towards a precise definition of the OMG/MDA framework. In: Proceedings of ASE ’01, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 273–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Bézivin J, Lemesle R (1998) Ontology-based layered semantics for precise OA&D modeling. In: Bosch J, Mitchell S (eds) Object-oriented technology: ECOOP ’97 workshop reader. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1357. Springer, Berlin, pp 287–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkkemper S (1990) Formalisation of information systems modelling. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nijmegen, Thesis Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkkemper S (1996) Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inform Software Tech 38(4):275–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkkemper S, Saeki M, Harmsen F (2001) A method engineering language for the description of systems development methods (extended abstract). In: Dittrich KR, Geppert A, Norrie MC (eds) Advanced information systems engineering: proceedings of the 13th international conference, CAiSE 2001, Interlaken, Switzerland, 4–8 June 2001. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2068. Springer, Berlin, pp 473–476

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge M (1977) Treatise on basic philosophy: vol. 3: ontology I: the furniture of the world. Reidel, Boston

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge M (1979) Treatise on basic philosophy: vol. 4: ontology II: a world of systems. Reidel, Boston

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron J (2002) Configurable development processes: keeping the focus on what is being produced. Comm ACM 45(3):72–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervera M, Albert M, Torres V, Pelechano V (2011) Turning method engineering support into reality. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 138–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Chroust G (2000) Software process models: structure and challenges. In: Feng Y, Notkin D, Gaudel MC (eds) Software: theory and practice—proceedings, IFIP congress 2000. Kluwer, Amsterdam, pp 279–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcho O, Fernandez-Lopez M, Gomez-Perez A (2006) Ontological engineering: principles, methods, tools and languages. In: Calero C, Ruiz F, Piattini M (eds) Ontologies for software engineering and software technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cortes Cornax M, Dupuy-Chessa S, Rieu D (2011) Bridging the gap between business processes and service composition through service choreographies. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 190–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Cossentino M (2006) Personal communication to first author

    Google Scholar 

  • Cossentino M, Gaglio S, Garro A, Seidita V (2007) Method fragments for agent design methodologies: from standardization to research. Int J Agent-Oriented Software Eng 1(1):91–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deneckère R, Kornyshova E, Rolland C (2009) Enhancing the guidance of the intentional model “MAP”: graph theory application. In: Proceedings of the third IEEE international conference on research challenges in information science, RCIS 2009, Fès, Morocco, 22–24 April 2009. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 13–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Devedzic V (2002) Understanding ontological engineering. Comm ACM 45(4):136–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson O, Henderson-Sellers B, Ågerfalk PJ (2013) Ontological and linguistic metamodelling revisited—a language use approach. Inform Software Tech 55(12):2099–2124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein A, Kramer J, Goedicke M (1990) ViewPoint oriented software development. Proceedings of Conférence Le Génie Logiciel et ses applications, Toulouse, pp 337–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Firesmith DG, Henderson-Sellers B (2002) The OPEN process framework. An introduction. Addison-Wesley, London, p 330

    Google Scholar 

  • Firesmith D, Henderson-Sellers B, Graham I (1997) OPEN modeling language (OML) reference manual. SIGS Books, New York, NY, p 276

    Google Scholar 

  • Flatscher RG (2002) Metamodeling in EIA/CDIF—meta-metamodel and metamodels. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 12(4):322–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gašević D, Kaviani N, Hatala M (2007) On metamodeling in megamodels. In: Engels G, Opdyke B, Schmidt DC, Weil F (eds) MoDELS 2007. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4735. Springer, Berlin, pp 91–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2006a) A powertype-based metamodelling framework. Software Syst Model 5(1):72–90. doi:10.1007/210270-005-0099-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2006b) An ontology for software development methodologies and endeavours. In: Calero C, Ruiz F, Piattini M (eds) Ontologies in software engineering and software technology. Springer, New York, NY, pp 123–152

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2006c). On the ease of extending a powertype-based methodology metamodel. In: Meta-modelling and ontologies. Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on meta-modelling, WoMM 2006, LNI, vol P-96, pp 11–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2007) Modelling software development methodologies: a conceptual foundation. J Syst Software 80(11):1778–1796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2008a) A work product pool approach to methodology specification and enactment. J Syst Software 81(8):1288–1305. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2007.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B (2008b) Metamodelling for software engineering. Wiley, Chichester, p 210

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Perez C, Giorgini P, Henderson-Sellers B (2009) Method construction by goal analysis. In: Barry C, Conboy K, Lang M, Wojtkowski G, Wojtkowski W (eds) Information systems development. Challenges in practice, theory, and education. Springer, New York, NY, pp 79–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosz G, Rolland C (1990) Using artificial intelligence techniques to formalize the information system design process, DEXA. Springer, Berlin, pp 374–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl Acquis 5:199–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guarino N (1998) Formal ontology and information systems. In: Proceedings of the International conference on formal ontology in information systems—FOIS ’98, Trento, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Guizzardi G (2005) Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models. University of Twente, Enschede

    Google Scholar 

  • Guizzardi G (2007) On ontology, ontologies, conceptualizations, modeling languages, and (meta)models. In: Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications volume 155. Proceedings of the 2007 conference on databases and information systems IV: selected papers from the seventh international Baltic conference DB&IS 2006. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 18–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Guizzardi G, Wagner G (2005a) On the ontological foundations of agent concepts. In: Bresciani P, Giorgini P, Henderson-Sellers B, Low G, Winikoff M (eds) Agent-oriented information systems II, vol 3508. Springer, Berlin, pp 113–128

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Guizzardi G, Wagner G (2005b) Some applications of a unified foundational ontology in business modeling. In: Green P, Rosemann M (eds) Business systems analysis with ontologies. IGI Group, Hershey, PA, pp 345–367

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Guzélian G, Cauvet C (2007) SO2M: towards a service-oriented approach for method engineering. In: Proceedings of IKE ’07, Las Vegas, NV, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel D (1987) Statecharts: a visual formulation for complex systems. Sci Comput Program 8(3):231–274

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Harmsen AF, Saeki M (1996) Comparison of four method engineering languages. In: Brinkkemper S, Lyytinen K, Welke RJ (eds) Method engineering. Principles of method construction and tool support. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 209–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2002) Process metamodelling and process construction: examples using the OPEN process framework (OPF). Ann Software Eng 14:341–362

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2006a) Method engineering: theory and practice. In: Karagiannis D, Mayr HC (eds) Information systems technology and its applications. Proceedings of the 5th international conference ISTA, 30–31 May 2006, Klagenfurt, Austria. Lecture notes in informatics (LNI), vol P-84. Gesellschaft für Informatik, Bonn, pp 13–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2007) On the challenges of correctly using metamodels in method engineering, keynote paper. In: Fujita H, Pisanelli D (eds) New trends in software methodologies, tools and techniques. Proceedings of the sixth SoMeT_07. Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol 161. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 3–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2011a) Random thoughts on multi-level conceptual modelling. In: Delcambre L, Kaschek R (eds) The evolution of conceptual modeling. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 6520. Springer, Berlin, pp 93–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2011b) Bridging metamodels and ontologies in software engineering. J Syst Software 84(2):301–313. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2010.10.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (2012) On the mathematics of modelling, metamodelling, ontologies and modelling languages (SpringerBriefs in computer science). Springer, Heidelberg, p 106

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Bulthuis A (1996) The COMMA project. Object Magazine 6(4):24–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Bulthuis A (1998) Object-oriented metamethods. Springer, New York, NY, p 158

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Gonzalez-Perez C (2005c) Connecting powertypes and stereotypes. J Object Tech 4(7):83–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Gonzalez-Perez C (2011) Towards the use of granularity theory for determining the size of atomic method fragments for use in situational method engineering. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 49–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Ralyte J (2010) Situational method engineering: state-of-the-art review. J Univers Comput Sci 16(3):424–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Gonzalez-Perez C, Ralyté J (2008) Comparison of method chunks and method fragments for situational method engineering. In: Proceedings 19th Australian software engineering conference. ASWEC2008, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 479–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Eriksson O, Gonzalez-Perez C, Ågerfalk PJ (2013) Ptolemaic metamodelling? The need for a paradigm shift. In: Cueva Lovelle JM, Pelayo García-Bustelo C, Sanjuán Martínez O (eds) Progressions and innovations in model-driven software engineering. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp 90–146

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hesse W (2008a) Engineers discovering the “real world”—from model-driven to ontology-based software engineering. In: Kaschek R, Kop C, Steinberger C, Fliedl G (eds) UNISCON 2008. LNBIP vol. 5. Springer, Berlin, pp 136–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Hesse W (2008b) From conceptual models to ontologies—a software engineering approach, paper presented at Dagstuhl seminar on conceptual modelling, 27–30 April 2008 (preprint on conference website: http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2008/1598)

  • Hobbs J (1985) Granularity. In: Proceedings of the international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-85)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppenbrouwers SJBA, Proper HA, van der Weide ThP (2005) A fundamental view on the process of conceptual modelling. In: Delcambre L, Kop C, Mayr HC, Mylopoulos J, Pastor O (eds) ER 2005. Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, vol 3716. Springer, Berlin, pp 128–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Hug C, Front A, Rieu D, Henderson-Sellers B (2009) A method to build information systems engineering process metamodels. J Syst Software 82(10):1730–1742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey WS, Kellner MI (1989) Software process modeling: principles of entity process models, ICSE 1989. IEEE Computer Society/ACM Press, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 331–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacovelli A (2011) Personal communication to first author

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacovelli A, Souveyet C (2011) Towards common ground in SME: an ontology of method descriptors. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 77–90

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC (2007) Software engineering: metamodel for development methodologies. ISO/IEC 24744. International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC (2010a) Software engineering: metamodel for development methodologies. Annex A—notation. International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarke M, Mylopoulos J, Schmidt JW, Vassiliou Y (1992) DAIDA: an environment for evolving information systems. ACM Trans Inform Syst 10(1):1–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarke M, Rolland C, Sutcliffe A, Domges R (1999) The NATURE requirements engineering. Shaker, Aachen

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeusfeld MA (2011) A deductive view on process-data diagrams. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 123–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson F, Ågerfalk PJ (2004) Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Inform Software Tech 46:619–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson F, Ågerfalk PJ (2009a) Exploring agile values in method configuration. Eur J Inform Syst 18(4):300–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson F, Ågerfalk PJ (2009b) Towards structured flexibility in information systems development: devising a method for method configuration. J Database Manag 20(3):51–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson F, Wistrand K (2006) Combining method engineering with activity theory: theoretical grounding of the method component concept. Eur J Inform Syst 15:82–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaschek R (2005) Modelling ontology use for information system. In: Althoff K-D, Dengel A, Bergmann R, Nick M, Roth-Berghofer Th (eds) Professional knowledge management. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3782. Springer, Berlin, pp 609–622

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly S (1993) A matrix editor for a MetaCASE environment. In: Brinkkemper S, Harmsen F (eds) Proceedings of fourth workshop on the next generation of CASE tools. Memoranda Informatica 93.3, Universiteit Twente, 1–14 May 1993

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly S (1997) Towards a comprehensive MetaCASE and CAME environment: conceptual architectural, functional and usability advances in MetaEdit+ dissertation, Jyväskylä studies in computer science, economics and statistics, vol 41, University of Jyväskylä, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly S, Lyytinen K, Rossi M (1996) MetaEdit+: a fully configurable multi-user and multi-tool CASE and CAME environment. In: Vassiliou Y, Mylopoulos J (eds) Proceedings of the 8th conference on advanced information systems engineering. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornyshova E, Deneckère R, Rolland C (2011) Method families concept: application to decision-making methods. In: Halpin T, Nurcan S, Krogstie J, Soffer P, Proper E, Schmidt R, Bider I (eds) BPMDS 2011 and EMMSAD 2011. LNBIP, vol 81. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 413–427

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruchten PH (1999) The rational unified process: an introduction. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Kühne T (2006) Matters of (meta-) modelling. Software Syst Model 5:369–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunz W, Rittel HWJ (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Working paper 131. Institute for Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Laarman A, Kurtev I (2010) Ontological metamodelling with explicit instantiation. In: van den Brand M, Gašević D, Gray J (eds) Software language engineering, second international conference, SLE 2009, revised selected papers. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5969. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 174–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Leppänen M (2006) Towards an ontology for information systems development. In: Krogstie J, Halpin T, Proper E (eds) The 9th international workshop on exploring modeling methods in systems analysis and design (EMMSAD ’06), Luxemburg, 5–6 June 2006, in conjunction with the 18th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE ’06), published in Latour T. and Petit M (eds) Proceedings of workshops and doctoral consortium, Presses Universitaires de Namur, pp 363–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Leppänen M (2007) An ontological framework of method engineering: an overall structure. In: Proper E, Halpin T, Krostie J (eds) 10th International workshop on exploring modeling methods in systems analysis and design (EMMSAD ’07), 11–12 June 2007, Trondheim, Norway. Proceedings of workshops and doctoral consortium. CEUR-WS, vol 365, pp 41–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Marttiin P, Lyytinen K, Rossi M, Tahvanainen V-P, Tolvanen J-P (1995) Modeling requirements for future CASE: issues and implementation considerations. Inform Resour Manag J 8(1):15–25

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor JD, Korson T (1993) Supporting dimensions of classification in object-oriented design. J Object-Orient Prog 5(9):25–30

    Google Scholar 

  • McIlroy MD (1968) Mass produced software components. Paper presented at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) conference on software engineering, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellor SJ, Scott K, Uhl A, Weise D (2004) MDA distilled. Principles of model-driven architecture. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, p 150

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirbel I (2006) Method chunk federation. In: Latour T, Petit M (eds) CAiSE ’06. 18th Conference on advanced information systems engineering—trusted information systems, Luxembourg 5–9 June 2006. Proceedings of the workshops and doctoral consortium. Namur University Press, Namur, pp 407–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirbel I, Ralyté J (2006) Situational method engineering: combining assembly-based and roadmap-driven approaches. Requir Eng 11:58–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niknafs A, Asadi M, Abolhassani H (2007) Ontology-based method engineering. Int J Comput Sci Netw Secur 7(8):282–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell JJ (1994) Power types. J Object-Orient Prog 7(2):8–12

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • OMG (1997) UML semantics. Version 1.1, 15 September 1997, OMG document ad/97-08-04

    Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2002) Software process engineering metamodel specification, formal/2002-11-14. Object Management Group

    Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2003) MDA guide version 1.0.1, OMG document omg/03-06-01

    Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2005a) Software process engineering metamodel specification, version 1.1. formal/05-01-06. Object Management Group

    Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2007) Unified Modeling Language: superstructure. Version 2.1.1, OMG document formal/07-02-03

    Google Scholar 

  • OMG (2008) Software & systems process engineering meta-model specification. Version 2.0, OMG document number: formal/2008-04-01

    Google Scholar 

  • OOSPICE (2002) Software process improvement and capability determination for object-oriented/component-based software development. www.oospice.com

  • Opdahl A, Henderson-Sellers B (2000) Evaluating and improving OO modelling languages using the BWW-model. In: Dampney CNG (ed) Proceedings of the information systems foundations workshop—ontology, semiotics and practice 1999, Lighthouse Press, Macquarie University, Sydney, pp 31–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Opdahl A, Henderson-Sellers B (2002) Ontological evaluation of the UML using the Bunge-Wand-Weber model. Software Syst Model 1(1):43–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Opdahl AL, Henderson-Sellers B, Barbier F (2001) Ontological analysis of whole-part relationships in OO models. Inform Software Tech 43(6):387–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OPF (2005) Open process framework. http://www.opfro.org

  • Plihon V (1996) Un environnement pour l’ingénierie des méthodes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Paris I, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts C (1989) A generic model for representing design methods. In: ICSE ’89, ACM Press, Washington, DC, pp 217–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts C, Bruns G (1988) Recording the reasons for design decisions. In: ICSE ’88, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 418–427

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralyté J (2004) Towards situational methods for information systems development: engineering reusable method chunks. In: Vasilecas O, Caplinskas A, Wojtkowski W, Wojtkowski WG, Zupancic J, Wrycza S (eds) Proceedings of the 13th international conference on information systems development. Advances in theory, practice and education. Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania, pp 271–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralyté J, Rolland C (2001a) An assembly process model for method engineering. In: Dittrich KR, Geppert A, Norrie MC (eds) Advanced information systems engineering. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2068. Springer, Berlin, pp 267–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralyté J, Rolland C (2001b) An approach for method engineering. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on conceptual modelling (ER2001). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2224. Springer, Berlin, pp 471–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralyté J, Backlund P, Kühn H, Jeusfeld MA (2006) Method chunks for interoperability. In: Embley DW, Olivé A, Ram S (eds) Proceedings of ER2006. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4215. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 339–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker J, Rosemann M, Green P, Indulska M (2007) Exending the scope of representation theory: a review and proposed research model. In: Hart DN, Gregor SD (eds) Information systems foundations: theory, representation and reality. ANU E Press, Canberra, pp 93–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland C (1998) A comprehensive view of process engineering. In: Pernici B, Thanos C (eds) Advanced information systems engineering: proceedings of the 10th international conference, CAiSE ’98, Pisa, Italy, June 1998. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1413. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland R (2005) Modelisation of the O* process with MAP, internal report of the ‘Centre de Recherche en Informatique’, University Paris 1 Sorbonne

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland C, Souveyet C, Moreno M (1995) An approach for defining ways-of-working. Inform Syst 20(4):295–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland C, Plihon V, Ralyté J (1998) Specifying the reuse context of scenario method chunks. In: Pernici B, Thanos C (eds) Advanced information systems engineering: proceedings of the 10th international conference, CAiSE ’98, Pisa, Italy, 8–12 June 1998. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1413. Springer, Berlin, pp 191–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland C, Prakash N, Benjamen A (1999) A multi-model view of process modelling. Requir Eng 4(4):169–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolland C, Nurcan S, Grosz G (2000) A decision making pattern for guiding the enterprise knowledge development process. J Inf Software Technol 42:313–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi M, Brinkkemper S (1996) Complexity metrics for systems development methods and techniques. Inform Syst 21(2):209–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz F, Hilera JR (2006) Using ontologies in software engineering and technology. In: Calero C, Ruiz F, Piattini M (eds) Ontologies for software engineering and software technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 49–102

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rupprecht C, Funffinger M, Knublauch H, Rose T (2000) Capture and dissemination of experience about the construction of engineering processes. In: Proceedings of the 12th conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAISE). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1789. Springer, Berlin, pp 294–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeki M (2002) Role of model transformation in method engineering. In: Banks Pidduck A, Mylopoulos J, Woo CC, Tamer Ozsu M (eds) CAISE 2002. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2348. Springer, Berlin, pp 626–642

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeki M (2003a) Embedding metrics into information systems development methods: an application of method engineering technique. In: Eder J, Missikoff M (eds) Proceedings of CAiSE ’03. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2681. Springer, Berlin, pp 374–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeki M, Kaiya H (2007) On relationships among models, meta models and ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 6th OOPSLA workshop on domain-specific modeling

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwaber K, Beedle M (2001) Agile software development with SCRUM. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidewitz E (2003) What models mean. IEEE Software 20(5):26–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidita V, Ralyté J, Henderson-Sellers B, Cossentino M, Arni-Bloch N (2007) A comparison of deontic matrices, maps and activity diagrams for the construction of situational methods. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE Forum, CAiSE2007, Trondheim, June 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolander K (1990) Metamodels in CASE environments. Licenciate Thesis, computer science reports, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolander K (1992) OPRR—a model for modeling systems development methods. In: Lyytinen K, Tahvanainen V-P (eds) Next generation CASE tools. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 224–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolander K, Tahvanainen V-P, Lyytinen K, Marttiin P (1991) MetaEdit—a flexible graphical environment for methodology modeling. In: Andersen R, Bubenko J, S¢lvberg A (eds) Advanced information systems engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 168–193

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Standards Australia (2004) Standard metamodel for software development methodologies, AS 4651-2004. Standards Australia, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens P, Pooley R (2006) Using UML: software engineering with objects and components. Addison Wesley, Essex

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunyaev A, Hansen M, Krcmar H (2008) Method engineering: a formal description. In: Proceedings ISD 2008, 17th international conference on information systems development, Paphos, Cyprus, 25–27 August 2008. Also in: information systems development—towards a service provision society, Springer, pp 645–654

    Google Scholar 

  • Ter Hofstede AHM, Verhoef TF (1997) On the feasibility of situational method engineering. Inform Syst 22(6/7):401–422

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ter Hofstede AHM, Proper H, van der Weide P (1993) Formal definition of a conceptual language for the description and manipulation of information models. Inform Syst 18(7):489–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolvanen J-P (1998) Incremental method engineering with modeling tools. Dissertation, Jyväskylä studies in computer science, economics and statistics, vol 47, University of Jyväskylä, Finland, p 301

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolvanen J-P, Lyytinen K (1993) Flexible method adaptation in CASE—the metamodeling approach. Scand J Inform Syst 5:51–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolvanen J-P, Marttiin P, Smolander K (1993) An integrated model for information systems modelling. In: Nunamaker JF, Sprague RH (eds) Proceedings of the 26th annual Hawaii international conference on systems science. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tran Q-NN, Low G (2008) MOBMAS: a methodology for ontology-based multi-agent systems development. Inform Software Tech 50(7–8):697–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran Q-NN, Low G, Beydoun G (2006) A methodological framework for ontology centric oriented software engineering. Int J Comput Sci Eng 21(2):117–132

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Weerd I, Brinkkemper S, Souer J, Versendaal J (2006) A situational implementation method for web-based content management system-applications: method engineering and validation in practice. Software Process Improv Pract 11(5):521–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Weerd I, Brinkkemper S, Versendaal J (2007) Concepts for incremental method evolution: empirical exploration and validation in requirements management. In: Krogstie J, Opdahl AL, Sindre G (eds) CAiSE 2007. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4495. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 469–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlaanderen K, van de Weerd I, Brinkkemper S (2011) The online method engine: from process assessment to method execution. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 108–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y (1996) Ontology as a foundation for meta-modelling and method engineering. Inform Software Tech 38:281–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y, Weber R (1988) An ontological analysis of some fundamental information systems concepts. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on information systems, Minneapolis, 30 November to 3 December 1988

    Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y, Weber R (1990) An ontological model of an information system. IEEE Trans Software Eng 16(11):1282–1292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y, Weber R (1993) On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. J Inform Syst 3:217–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y, Weber R (1995) On the deep structure of information systems. Inform Syst J 5(3):203–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welke RJ (1988) The CASE repository: more than another database application. MetaSystems Ltd., Ann Arbor, MI

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitmire SA (1997) Object oriented design measurement. Wiley, New York, p 452

    Google Scholar 

  • Wistrand K, Karlsson F (2004) Method components—rationale revealed. In: Persson A, Stirna J (eds) Advanced information systems engineering: proceedings of the 16th international conference, CAiSE 2004, Riga, Latvia, 7–11 June 2004. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3084. Springer, Berlin, pp 189–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyssusek B (2006) On ontological foundations of conceptual modelling. Scand J Inform Syst 18(1):63–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyssusek B, Klaus H (2005) Ontological foundations of information systems analysis and design: extending the scope of the discussion. In: Green P, Rosemann M (eds) Business systems analysis with ontologies. IGI Group, Hershey, PA, pp 322–344

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zdravkovic J, Zikra I, Ilayeruma T (2011) An MDA method for service modelling by fomalizing REA and open-edi business frameworks with SBVR. In: Ralyté J, Mirbel I, Deneckère R (eds) Engineering methods in the service-oriented context. Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 working conference on method engineering, ME 2011, Paris France, April 2011. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 219–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoukar I (2005) MIBE: Méthode d’Ingénierie des Besoins pour l’implantation d’un progiciel de gestion intégré (ERP). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Paris I, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoukar I, Salinesi C (2004) Using goal/strategy/maps to reduce the language disparity issue in ERP projects. In: Grundspenkis J, Kirikova M (eds) Knowledge and model driven information systems engineering for networked organisations, proceedings. Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Riga, vol 2, pp 325–339

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Software, University of Technology, Sydney, Broadway, New South Wales, Australia

    Brian Henderson-Sellers

  2. CUI, Battelle - bâtiment A, University of Geneva, Carouge, Switzerland

    Jolita Ralyté

  3. Dept. of Informatics and Media, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Pär J. Ågerfalk

  4. Aalto University, Aalto, Finland

    Matti Rossi

Authors
  1. Brian Henderson-Sellers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jolita Ralyté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pär J. Ågerfalk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matti Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Henderson-Sellers, B., Ralyté, J., Ågerfalk, P.J., Rossi, M. (2014). Formal Descriptions. In: Situational Method Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41467-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41467-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41466-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41467-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation