CAiSE 2005: Advanced Information Systems Engineering pp 277-292 | Cite as
A Process for Generating Fitness Measures
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that the system functionality captured in a system model has to match organisational requirements available in the business model. However, fitness measures are rarely integrated in design methodologies. The paper proposes a framework to ease the generation of fitness measures adapted to a given methodology in order to quantify to which extent there is fit between the business and the system. The framework comprises a generic level and a specific level. The former provides generic evaluation criteria and metrics expressed on the basis of business and system ontologies. The specific level is dealing with a specific set of metrics adapted to specific business and system models. The paper presents the process for generating a specific set of measures from the generic set, illustrates it with two specific models and shows how the use of the generated metrics can help in making design decisions in the development of a hotel room booking system.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Giaglis, G.M.: A Taxonomy of Business Process Modelling and Information Systems Modelling Techniques. Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 13(2), 209–228 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Fifth Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support BPMDS 2004, Riga, Latvia (2004)Google Scholar
- 3.Sabherwal, R., Chan, Y.E.: Alignment Between Business and IS Strategies: A Study of Prospectors, Analyzers, and Defenders. Information Systems Research 12(1), 11–33 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Henderson, J.C., Venkatraman, N.: Strategic Alignment: Leveraging Information Technology for Transforming Organizations. IBM Systems Journal 32(1), 4–16 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Munford, E.: Participative Systems Design: Structure and Method systems, Objectives, Solution, vol. 1, pp. 5–19. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1981)Google Scholar
- 6.Rubin, K.S., Goldberg, A.: Object Behavior Analysis, Communications of the ACM, vol 35, N°9 (1992)Google Scholar
- 7.Dardenne, A., Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed Requirements Acquisition, Science of Computer Programming, vol. 20, pp. 3–50. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1993)Google Scholar
- 8.Soffer, P.: Fit Measurement: How to Distinguish Between Fit and Misfit, note for BPMDS 2004, Riga, Latvia (2004)Google Scholar
- 9.Regev, G., Wegmann, A.: Remaining Fit: On the Creation and Maintenance of Fit. In: Proceedings of BPMDS 2004, Riga, Latvia (2004)Google Scholar
- 10.Wand, Y., Weber, R.: An Ontological Model of an Information System. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1282–1292 (November 1992)Google Scholar
- 11.Soffer, P., Wand, Y.: Goal-Driven Analysis of Process Model Validity. In: Persson, A., Stirna, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3084, pp. 521–535. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Bunge, M.: Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Ontology I. The Furniture of the World, Reidel (1977)Google Scholar
- 13.Bunge, M.: Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Ontology II. A World of Systems, Reidel (1979)Google Scholar
- 14.Rolland, C., Prakash, N.: Matching ERP System Functionality to Customer Requirements. In: Proceedings RE 2001, Toronto, Canada, pp. 66–75 (2001)Google Scholar
- 15.Lee, S.P., Rolland, C., Brunet, J.: Abstraction in an Object-Oriented Analysis Method. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science 10(1), 53–63 (1997)Google Scholar
- 16.Cavano, J.P., McCall, J.: A Framework for the Measurement of Software Quality. In: Proceedings of the Software Quality and Assurance Workshop, San Diego, pp. 133–139 (1978)Google Scholar
- 17.Etien, A., Rolland, C.: Measuring the Fitness relationship. Submitted to the special issue Coordinated Development of Business Processes and their Support Systems of the Requirements Engineering Journal (2005)Google Scholar