Advertisement

Business & Information Systems Engineering

, Volume 60, Issue 1, pp 69–80 | Cite as

From Expert Discipline to Common Practice: A Vision and Research Agenda for Extending the Reach of Enterprise Modeling

  • Kurt Sandkuhl
  • Hans-Georg Fill
  • Stijn Hoppenbrouwers
  • John Krogstie
  • Florian Matthes
  • Andreas Opdahl
  • Gerhard Schwabe
  • Ömer Uludag
  • Robert Winter
Research Notes

Abstract

The benefits of enterprise modeling (EM) and its contribution to organizational tasks are largely undisputed in business and information systems engineering. EM as a discipline has been around for several decades but is typically performed by a limited number of people in organizations with an affinity to modeling. What is captured in models is only a fragment of what ought to be captured. Thus, this research note argues that EM is far from its maximum potential. Many people develop some kind of model in their local practice without thinking about it consciously. Exploiting the potential of this “grass roots modeling” could lead to groundbreaking innovations. The aim is to investigate integration of the established practices of modeling with local practices of creating and using model-like artifacts of relevance for the overall organization. The paper develops a vision for extending the reach of EM, identifies research areas contributing to the vision and proposes elements of a future research agenda.

Keywords

Enterprise modeling Grass roots modeling Research agenda 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper is a result of the Dagstuhl seminar no. 16192 on, Supporting Organizational Efficiency and Agility: Models, Languages and Software Systems (see http://www.dagstuhl.de/de/programm/kalender/semhp/?semnr=16192).

References

  1. Allemang D, Hendler J (2011) Semantic web for the working ontologist: effective modeling in RDFS and OWL. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  2. Anaya V, Berio G, Harzallah M, Heymans P, Matulevičius R, Opdahl AL, Panetto H, Verdecho M J (2010) The unified enterprise modelling language—overview and further work. Comput Ind 61(2)Google Scholar
  3. Benkenstein M, Fellmann M, Leyer M, Sandkuhl K (2016) The value of enterprise modelling: towards a service-centric perspective. In: Horkoff J, Jeusfeld MA, Persson A (eds) The practice of enterprise modeling. In: 9th IFIP WG 8.1. Working Conference, PoEM 2016, pp 299–306Google Scholar
  4. Berners-Lee T, Hendler J et al (2001) The semantic web—a new form of web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Sci Am 284(5):34–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berzisa S, Bravos G, González TC, Czubayko U, España S, Grabis J et al (2015) Capability driven development: an approach to designing digital enterprises. Bus Inf Syst Eng 57(1):15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bizer C, Heath T, Berners-Lee T (2009) Linked data-the story so far. Semantic services, interoperability and web applications: emerging concepts. Int J Semant Web Inf Syst 5(3):205–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) Crowdsourcing: how to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Q Exec 4(12):199–211Google Scholar
  8. Bork D, Fill HG (2014) Formal aspects of enterprise modeling methods: a comparison framework. In: Proceedings of the 2014 47th International Conference on System Sciences, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  9. Bork D, Fill HG, Karagiannis D, Miron ET, Tantouris N, Walch M (2015) Conceptual modelling for smart cities: a teaching case. Inter Design Arch J 27:10–27Google Scholar
  10. Brenner W, Karagiannis D, Kolbe L, Krüger J, Leifer L, Lamberti H, Leimeister J, Österle H, Petrie C, Plattner H, Schwabe G, Uebernickel F, Winter R, Zarnekow R (2015) User, use & utility research—the digital user as new design perspective in business and information systems engineering. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1):55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corradi G, Gherardi S, Verzelloni L (2010) Through the practice lens: where is the bandwagon of practice-based studies heading? Manag Learn 41(3):265–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dalkir K (2013) Knowledge management in theory and practice. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Delfmann P, Herwig S, Lis L, Stein A, Tent K, Becker J (2010) Pattern specification and matching in conceptual models—a generic approach based on set operations. Enterp Model Inf Syst Archit 5(3):24–43Google Scholar
  14. Dietz JLG (2006) Enterprise ontology—theory and methodology. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dietz JLG (2008) Architecture. Building strategy into design. Academic Service, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  16. Fellmann M, Zarvic N, Metzger D, Koschmider A (2015) Requirements catalog for business process modeling recommender systems WI 2015, Osnabrück, Germany, March 4–6. In: Thomas O, Teuteberg F (eds) Smart enterprise engineering: 12. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015, pp 393–407Google Scholar
  17. Fill HG (2011) On the conceptualization of a modeling language for semantic model annotations. In: CAiSE 2011 Workshops, Springer. LNBIP vol. 83, pp 134–148Google Scholar
  18. Fill HG (2016) SeMFIS: a flexible engineering platform for semantic annotations of conceptual models. Semant Web 8(5):747–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fill HG, Johannsen F (2016) A knowledge perspective on big data by joining enterprise modeling and data analyses. In: Bui TX, Sprague RH (eds) 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  20. Fill HG, Karagiannis D (2013) On the conceptualisation of modelling methods using the adoxx meta modelling platform. Enterp Model Inf Syst Archit 8(1):4–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fill HG, Redmond T, Karagiannis D (2012) FDMM: A formalism for describing ADOxx meta models and models. In: Leszek M, Cuzzocrea A, Cordeiro J (eds) Proceedings of ICEIS 2012, vol. 3. SciTePress, Lisbon, pp 133–144Google Scholar
  22. Fischbach M, Puschmann T, Alt R (2013) Service lifecycle management. Bus Inf Syst Eng 5(1):45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frank U (2014a) Multilevel modeling—toward a new paradigm of conceptual modeling and information systems design. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(6):319–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frank U (2014b) Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. Softw Syst Model 13(3):941–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frank U, Strecker S, Fettke P, vom Brocke J, Becker J, Sinz E (2014) The research field “modeling business information systems”—current challenges and elements of a future research agenda. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1)Google Scholar
  26. Fraser MD, Kumar K et al (1994) Strategies for incorporating formal specifications in software development. Commun ACM 37(10):74–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gardner D, Fehskens L, Naidu M, Rouse WB, Ross JW (2012) Point-counterpoint: enterprise architecture and enterprise transformation as related but distinct concepts. J Enter Transform 2(4):283–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gruber T (2008) Collective knowledge systems: where the social web meets the semantic web. J Web Sem 6(1):4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gutschmidt A, Sandkuhl K, Borchardt U (2017) Multi-touch table or plastic wall? Design of a study for the comparison of media in modeling workshops, 2016. In: Abramowicz W, Alt R, Franczyk B (eds) Business information systems workshops 2016, LNBIP 263. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 123–135Google Scholar
  30. Henderson-Sellers B, Ralyté J, Ågerfalk PJ, Rossi M (2014) Situational method engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 1–274Google Scholar
  31. Hermans FFJ (2012) Analyzing and visualizing spreadsheets. PhD thesis, Software Engineering Research Group, Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  32. Hoppenbrouwers SJBA, Rouwette EAJA (2012) A dialogue game for analysing group model building: framing collaborative modelling and its facilitation. Int J Org Design Eng 2(1):19–40Google Scholar
  33. Hoppenbrouwers SJBA, van Stokkum W (2013) From dialogue games to mthinklets: overview and synthesis of a collaborative modeling approach. Int J E-Collab 9(4):32–44Google Scholar
  34. ISO/IEC 24744 (2014) Software engineering—metamodel for development methodologies. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=62644. Accessed 23 Nov 2017
  35. Iyer B, Basole R (2016) Visualization to understand ecosystems. Commun ACM 59(11):27–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kolb J, Rudner B, Reichert M (2013) Gesture-based process modeling using multi-touch devices. IJISMD 4(4):48–69Google Scholar
  37. Krogstie J (2016) Quality in business process modeling. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Krogstie J, Dalberg V, Jensen SM (2006) Process modeling value framework. In: Manolopoulos Y, Filipe J, Constantopoulos P, Cordeiro J (eds) Selected papers from ICEIS 2006, LNBIP 3. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 309–321Google Scholar
  39. Krogstie BR, Schmidt AP, Kunzmann C, Krogstie J, Mora S (2013) Linking reflective learning and knowledge maturing in organizations. In: ARTEL@ EC-TEL, pp 13–28Google Scholar
  40. Kusel A, Schönböck J, Wimmer M, Kappel G, Retschitzegger W, Schwinger W (2015) Reuse in model-to-model transformation languages: are we there yet? Softw Syst Model 14(2):537–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Leimeister JM (2010) Collective intelligence. Bus Inf Syst Eng 4(2):245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lillehagen F, Krogstie J (2009) Active knowledge modelling of enterprises. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  43. Luff P, Heath C (1998) Mobility in collaboration. In: ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ACMGoogle Scholar
  44. Luff P, Hindmarsh J, Heath C (2000) Workplace studies: recovering work practice and informing system design. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maier S, Minas M (2015) Recording, processing, and visualizing changes in diagrams. In: IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric ComputingGoogle Scholar
  46. Martens A, Fettke P, Loos P (2015) Inductive development of reference process models based on factor analysis WI 2015, Osnabrück, March 4–6. In: Thomas O, Teuteberg F (eds) Smart Enterprise Engineering: 12. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015, pp 438–452Google Scholar
  47. Matthes F, Neubert C, Schneider AW (2013) Fostering collaborative and integrated enterprise architecture modeling. J Enterp Model Inf Syst Architectures 8(1)Google Scholar
  48. Narayanan NH, Hübscher R (1998) Visual language theory: towards a human-computer interaction perspective. In: Marriott K (ed) Visual language theory. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  49. Neumann G, Sobernig S, Aram M (2014) Evolutionary business information systems—perspectives and challenges of an emerging class of information systems. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1):33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Obrst L (2003) Ontologies for semantically interoperable systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, New Orleans, ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  52. Opdahl AL, Berio G, Harzallah M, Matulevičius R (2012) An ontology for enterprise and information systems modelling. Appl Ontol 7(1):49–92Google Scholar
  53. Oppl S (2016) Towards scaffolding collaborative articulation and alignment of mental models. In: Proceedings of ICKM 2016. Elsevier Procedia Computer ScienceGoogle Scholar
  54. Orlikowski W (1993) Learning from notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation. Inf Soc 9(3):237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Probst G, Raub S, Romhardt K (2000) Managing knowledge—building blocks for success. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  56. Reschenhofer T, Bhat M, Hernandez-Mendez A, Matthes F (2016) Lessons learned in aligning data and model evolution in collaborative information systems. In: Proc. International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)Google Scholar
  57. Ross JW, Quaadgras A (2012) Enterprise architecture is not just for architects. Center for Information Systems Research Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  58. Roth S, Hauder M, Matthes F (2013) Collaborative evolution of enterprise architecture models. 8th International Workshop on Models at Runtime (Models@run.time 2013)Google Scholar
  59. Sandkuhl K, Stirna J, Persson A, Wißotzki M (2014) Enterprise modeling: tackling business challenges with the 4EM method (The Enterprise Engineering Series). Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schatzki TR (2001) Practice minded orders. In: Schatzki TR, Knorr Cetina K, Savigny E (eds) The practice turn in contemporary theory. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  61. Star S, Griesemer J (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907–39. Soc Stud Sci 19(3):387–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stirna J, Persson A, Sandkuhl K (2007) Participative enterprise modeling: experiences and recommendations. International conference on advanced information systems engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 546–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Studer R, Benjamins VR, Fensel D (1998) Knowledge engineering: principles and methods. Data Knowl Eng 25(1):161–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Theunissen T, van Heesch U (2016) The disappearance of technical specifications in web and mobile applications. In: Proceedings of ECSAGoogle Scholar
  65. Thomas O, Fellmann M (2007) Semantic business process management: ontology-based process modeling using event-driven process chains. IBIS 2(1):29–44Google Scholar
  66. Van Deursen A, Klint P, Visser J (2000) Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography. Sigplan Not 35(6):26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vernadat FB (1996) Enterprise modelling and Integration. Chapman & HallGoogle Scholar
  68. von Hippel (2005) Democratizing innovation: the evolving phenomenon of user innovation. J Betriebswirtschaft 55(1):63–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weiss S, Aier S, Winter R (2013) Institutionalization and the effectiveness of enterprise architecture management. In: International Conference on Information Systems, AISGoogle Scholar
  70. Winter R (2004) Architektur braucht Management. Wirtschaftsinformatik 46(4):317–319Google Scholar
  71. Winter R (2014) Architectural thinking. Bus Inf. Syst Eng 6(6):361–364Google Scholar
  72. Yoon Y, Myers B (2015) Semantic zooming of code change history. In: IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computingGoogle Scholar
  73. Zdravkovic J, Stirna J, Kirikova M, Karagiannis, D, Winter R (2015) Advanced enterprise modeling. Bus Inf Syst Eng 57(1)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kurt Sandkuhl
    • 1
  • Hans-Georg Fill
    • 2
  • Stijn Hoppenbrouwers
    • 3
  • John Krogstie
    • 4
  • Florian Matthes
    • 5
  • Andreas Opdahl
    • 6
  • Gerhard Schwabe
    • 7
  • Ömer Uludag
    • 5
  • Robert Winter
    • 8
  1. 1.Institute of Computer Science, Faculty of Computer and Electrical EngineeringUniversity of RostockRostockGermany
  2. 2.Information Systems, System Development and Database Application Group, Faculty of Information Systems and Applied Computer SciencesUniversity of BambergBambergGermany
  3. 3.Faculty of EngineeringHAN University of Applied SciencesArnhemThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical EngineeringNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  5. 5.Chair of Software Engineering for Business Information Systems, Department of InformaticsTechnical University of MunichGarching Bei MünchenGermany
  6. 6.Department of Information Science and Media StudiesUniversity of BergenBergenNorway
  7. 7.Department of InformaticsUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  8. 8.Institute of Information ManagementUniversity of St. GallenSt.GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations