Software & Systems Modeling

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 1015–1041 | Cite as

Strategic business modeling: representation and reasoning

  • Jennifer Horkoff
  • Daniele Barone
  • Lei Jiang
  • Eric Yu
  • Daniel Amyot
  • Alex Borgida
  • John Mylopoulos
Theme Section Paper


Business intelligence (BI) offers tremendous potential for business organizations to gain insights into their day-to-day operations, as well as longer term opportunities and threats. However, most of today’s BI tools are based on models that are too much data-oriented from the point of view of business decision makers. We propose an enterprise modeling approach to bridge the business-level understanding of the enterprise with its representations in databases and data warehouses. The business intelligence model (BIM) offers concepts familiar to business decision making—such as goals, strategies, processes, situations, influences, and indicators. Unlike many enterprise models which are meant to be used to derive, manage, or align with IT system implementations, BIM aims to help business users organize and make sense of the vast amounts of data about the enterprise and its external environment. In this paper, we present core BIM concepts, focusing especially on reasoning about situations, influences, and indicators. Such reasoning supports strategic analysis of business objectives in light of current enterprise data, allowing analysts to explore scenarios and find alternative strategies. We describe how goal reasoning techniques from conceptual modeling and requirements engineering have been applied to BIM. Techniques are also provided to support reasoning with indicators linked to business metrics, including cases where specifications of indicators are incomplete. Evaluation of the proposed modeling and reasoning framework includes an on-going prototype implementation, as well as case studies.


Business intelligence Business model Conceptual modeling languages Influence diagrams Goal Situation  Key performance indicators  Strategic planning 


  1. 1.
    Isik, O., Jones, M.C., Sidorova, A.: Business intelligence (BI) success and the role of BI capabilities. Intell. Syst. Account. Finance Manag. 18(4), 161–176 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    IBM: Cognos Express Reporter. (2012). Accessed Apr 2012
  3. 3.
    Stroh, F., Winter, R., Wortmann, F.: Method support of information requirements analysis for analytical information systems. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 3(1), 33–43 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dealtry, T.R.: Dynamic SWOT Analysis. Dynamic SWOT Associates, Birmingham (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Object Management Group: Business Motivation Model, Version 1.0. Technical Report May, Object Management Group (2002).
  7. 7.
    Barone, D., Mylopoulos, J., Jiang, L., Amyot, D.: Business intelligence model, ver. 1.0. Technical Report CSRG-607. Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto (2010).
  8. 8.
    Barone, D., Yu, E., Won, J., Jiang, L., Mylopoulos, J.: Enterprise modeling for business intelligence. In: The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, 3rd IFIP WG8.1 (PoEM’10). LNBIP, vol. 68, pp. 31–45. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barone, D., Peyton, L., Rizzolo, F., Amyot, D., Mylopoulos, J.: Towards model-based support for managing organizational transformation. In: E-Technologies: Transforma-tion in a Connected World. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 78, pp. 17–31. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jiang, L., Barone, D., Amyot, D., Mylopoulos, J.: Strategic models for business in-telligence: reasoning about opportunities and threats. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’11). LNCS, vol. 6998, pp. 429–443. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Barone, D., Jiang, L., Amyot, D., Mylopoulos, J.: Composite indicators for business in-telligence. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’11). LNCS, vol. 6998, pp. 448–454. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barone, D., Jiang, L., Amyot, D., Mylopoulos, J.: Reasoning with key performance indicators. In: Proceedings of the 4th IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling (PoEM11), pp. 82–96 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stirna, J., Persson, A.: Ten years plus with EKD: reflections from using an enterprise modeling method in practice. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD07), pp. 99–108. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rolland, C., Prakash, N.: Bridging the gap between organisational needs and ERP functionality. Requir. Eng. 5(3), 180–193 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B.A., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-Functional Requirements in Soft-ware Engineering. International Series in Software Engineering, vol. 5. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dardenne, A., Lamsweerde, A.V., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20(1–2), 3–50 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu, E.: Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements en-gineering. In: Proceedings of 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering. pp. 226–235. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    ITU-T, Intern. Telecom. Union: Recommendation Z.151 (11/08): Recommendation Z.151 (11/08) User Requirements Notation (URN) Language definition. Technical Report, ITU-T International Telecommunications Union, Geneva (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J., Nicchiarelli, E., Sebastiani, R.: Reasoning with goal models. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Conceptual Model-ing (ER’02). LNCS, vol. 3084, pp. 167–181. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J., Sebastiani, R.: Simple and minimum-cost satisfiability for goal models. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference On Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’04). LNCS, vol. 3084, pp. 20–35. Springer, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wetzel, T.: States of affairs. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Stanford University, Stanford (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Parmenter, D.: Key Performance Indicators. Wiley, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bresciani, P., Perini, A., Giorgini, P., Giunchiglia, F., Mylopoulos, J.: Tropos: an agent-oriented software development methodology. Auton. Agents MultiAgent Syst. 8(3), 203–236 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Uchil, A.: Goals-Based Strategic Planning: A No-Nonsense Practical Guide to Strategy. Outskirts Press, Denver (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harv. Bus. Rev. 70(1), 71–79 (1992)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Basili, V., Rombach, H.: The TAME project: towards improvement-oriented software environments. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 14(6), 758–773 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Letier, E., Lamsweerde, A.V.: Reasoning about partial goal satisfaction for requirements and design engineering. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 29(6), 53–62 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Amyot, D., Ghanavati, S., Horkoff, J., Mussbacher, G., Peyton, L., Yu, E.: Evaluating goal models within the goal-oriented requirements language. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(8), 841–877 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Horkoff, J., Yu, E.: Interactive analysis of agent-goal models in enterprise modeling. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des. (IJISMD) 1(4), 1–23 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J., Nicchiarelli, E., Sebastiani, R.: Formal reasoning techniques for goal models. J. Data Semant. 1, 1–20 (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J., Sebastiani, R.: Goal-oriented requirements analysis and reasoning in the Tropos methodology. Eng. Appl. Artif. Int. 18(2), 159–171 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Elahi, G., Yu, E.: Requirements trade-offs analysis in the absence of quantitative mea-sures: a heuristic method. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC ’11, pp. 651–658. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lamsweerde, A.V.: Reasoning about alternative requirements options. In: Conceptual Modeling Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 380–397. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Horkoff, J., Yu, E.: Finding solutions in goal models: an interactive backward reasoning approach. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’10). LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 59. Springer, Berlin (2010) Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Howard, R.A., Matheson, J.E.: Influence diagrams. Decis. Anal. 2(3), 127–143 (2005)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pourshahid, A., Chen, P., Amyot, D., Forster, A.J., Ghanavati, S., Peyton, L., Weiss, M.: Business process management with the user requirements notation. Electron. Commer. Res. 9(4), 269–316 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saaty, T.L.: How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48, 9–26 (1990)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    University of Ottawa: jUCMNav. (2011). Accessed Sept 2011
  39. 39.
    Open Model Initiative: Open Model Initiative. (2011). Accessed Sept 2011
  40. 40.
    GR-Tool: GR-Tool. (2010). Accessed Dec 2010
  41. 41.
    Loboda, T.D., Voortman, M.: GeNIe. (2012). Accessed Aug 2012
  42. 42.
    Eclipse Foundation: Graphiti. (2011). Accessed Sept 2011
  43. 43.
    Singular Systems: Jep Java. (2011). Accessed Sept 2011
  44. 44.
    Barone, D., Topaloglou, T., Mylopoulos, J.: Business intelligence modeling in action: a hospital case study. In: Proceedings of the 24th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’12). LNCS, vol. 7328, pp. 502–517. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    The Open Group: ArchiMate 2.0: An Open Group Standard. (2012). Accessed Aug 2012
  46. 46.
    Sutherland, J.: Business objects in corporate information systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 27(2), 274–276 (1995)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Loucopoulos, P., Katsouli, E.: Modelling business rules in an office environment. SIGOIS Bull. 13(2), 28–37 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Jablonski, S.: On the complementarity of workflow management and business process modeling. SIGOIS Bull. 16(1), 33–38 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Object Management Group: Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Version 2.1. Technical Report (2009).
  50. 50.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Elahi, G., Yu, E., Zannone, N.: A vulnerability-centric requirements engineering frame-work: analyzing security attacks, countermeasures, and requirements based on vulnera-bilities. Requir. Eng. 15(1), 41–62 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pourshahid, A., Richards, G., Amyot, D.: Toward a goal-oriented, business intelligence decision-making framework. In: Proceeding of E-Technologies: Transformation in a Connected World. LNBIP, vol. 78, pp. 100–115. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Popova, V., Sharpanskykh, A.: Formal modelling of organisational goals based on per-formance indicators. Data Knowl. Eng. 70(4), 335–364 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Souza, V., Lapouchnian, A., Mylopoulos, J.: System identification for adaptive software systems: a requirements-engineering perspective. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’11). LNCS, vol. 6998, pp. 346–361 (2011)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Souza, V., Mazón, J.N., Garrigós, I., Trujillo, J., Mylopoulos, J.: Monitoring strategic goals in data warehouses with awareness requirements. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Applied, Computing, pp. 1075–1082 (2012)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pentaho Corporation: Pentaho: Open Source Business Intelligence. (2011). Accessed Sept 2011

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer Horkoff
    • 1
  • Daniele Barone
    • 1
  • Lei Jiang
    • 1
  • Eric Yu
    • 2
  • Daniel Amyot
    • 3
  • Alex Borgida
    • 4
  • John Mylopoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of InformationUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.EECSUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceRutgers UniversityCamdenUSA

Personalised recommendations