Advertisement

Conceptual Modeling as a Tool for Corporate Governance Support: State of the Art and Research Agenda

  • Yves WauteletEmail author
  • Manuel Kolp
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

Early days of information systems engineering saw practitioners implementing a software solution without proper analysis of the business processes, organizational environment and partnerships’ context. Due to a tremendous failure rate, more and more effort has, over the years, been devoted to accurate domain analysis with the aim of representing the as-is and to-be organizational and data settings through conceptual models. The ability of conceptual models to exhaustively and adequately represent organizational setting behavior has hugely been enhanced through the use of goal-oriented modeling; the latter allows to represent stakeholders as well as their intentions and goals with realization scenarios. Such a tool nevertheless offers more potential than software development only. Researches have used conceptual models to sustain organization theory and represent strategic relationships among organizations in competition, cooperation and coopetition. Also, goal modeling allows to represent the long-term strategy as of a set of business objectives allowing to support reasoning for corporate and IT governance decisions. The paper overviews and investigates the use of conceptual modeling for strategic management to better understand the relationships among organizations, evaluate alternatives and estimate the consequences of IT governance decisions in terms of business and IT alignment. A research agenda is also provided.

References

  1. 1.
    Avison, D.E., Jones, J., Powell, P., Wilson, D.: Using and validating the strategic alignment model. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 13(3), 223–246 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2004.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bleistein, S.J., Aurum, A., Cox, K., Ray, P.K.: Strategy-oriented alignment in requirements engineering: Linking business strategy to requirements of e-business systems using the SOARE approach. J. Res. Pract. Inf. Technol. 36(4), 259 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bleistein, S.J., Cox, K., Verner, J.M.: Validating strategic alignment of organizational IT requirements using goal modeling and problem diagrams. J. Syst. Softw. 79(3), 362–378 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2005.04.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bleistein, S.J., Cox, K., Verner, J.M., Phalp, K.: B-SCP: a requirements analysis framework for validating strategic alignment of organizational IT based on strategy, context, and process. Inf. Softw. Technol. 48(9), 846–868 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2005.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daft, R.: Organization Theory and Design. Cengage Learning (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Do, T.T., Faulkner, S., Kolp, M.: Organizational multi-agent architectures for information systems. In: ICEIS 2003, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Angers, France, pp. 89–96 , 22–26 April 2003Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Du Plessis, J.J., Hargovan, A., Harris, J.: Principles of contemporary corporate governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dussauge, P., Garrette, B.: Cooperative Strategy: Competing Successfully Through Strategic Alliances. Wiley (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freeman, R.E.: Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gomes-Casseres, B.: The alliance revolution: the new shape of business rivalry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henderson, J.C., Venkatraman, H.: Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Syst. J. 32(1), 472–484 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jackson, M.: System behaviours and problem frames: concepts, concerns and the role of formalisms in the development of cyber-physical systems. In: Irlbeck, M., Peled, D.A., Pretschner, A. (eds.) Dependable software systems engineering, NATO science for peace and security series, D: Information and communication security, vol. 40, pp. 79–104. IOS Press (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jackson, M.A.: Problem frames—analysing and structuring software development problems. Pearson Education (2000). http://www.pearsoned.co.uk/Bookshop/detail.asp?item=100000000004768
  14. 14.
    Kolp, M., Wautelet, Y., Faulkner, S.: Sociocentric design of multi-agent architectures. In: Yu, E., Giorgini, P., Maiden, N., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) Social modeling for requirements engineering. MIT Press, Cambridge (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kolp, M., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J.: Multi-agent architectures as organizational structures. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 13(1), 3–25 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-006-5717-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kolp, M., Wautelet, Y.: Human organizational patterns applied to collaborative learning software systems. Comput. Hym. Behav. 51, 742–751 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lytras, M., Visvizi, A.: Who uses smart city services and what to make of it: toward interdisciplinary smart cities research. Sustainability 10(6), 1998 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mintzberg, H.: Structure in fives: designing effective organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morabito, J., Sack, I., Bhate, A.: Organization modeling: innovative architectures for the 21st century. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pant, V.: Strategic coopetition—a conceptual modeling framework for analysis and design. In: Ralyté, J., Wautelet, Y. (eds.) Proceedings of the doctoral consortium papers presented at the 11th IFIP WG 8.1 Working conference on the practice of enterprise modelling (PoEM 2018), Vienna, Austria, 31 October–2 November 2018. CEUR Workshop proceedings, vol. 2234, pp. 1–14. CEUR-WS.org (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pant, V., Yu, E.: Coopetition with frenemies: Towards modeling of simultaneous cooperation and competition among enterprises. In: The practice of enterprise modeling—9th IFIP WG 8.1. Working conference, PoEM 2016, Skövde, Sweden, 8–10 November 2016, Proceedings, pp. 164–178 (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pant, V., Yu, E.S.K.: Modeling simultaneous cooperation and competition among enterprises. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60(1), 39–54 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0514-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Porter, M.: Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. The Free Press, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Scott, W.: Organizations: rational, natural, and open systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Segil, L.: Intelligent business alliances : how to profit using today’s most important strategic tool. Times Business (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Todeva, E., Knoke, D.: Strategic alliances and models of collaboration. Manage. Decis. 43(1), 123–148 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wautelet, Y.: A model-driven it governance process based on the strategic impact evaluation of services. J. Syst. Softw. 149, 462–475 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wautelet, Y., Achbany, Y., Kolp, M.: A service-oriented framework for MAS modeling. In: Cordeiro, J., Filipe, J. (eds.) ICEIS 2008—Proceedings of the tenth international conference on enterprise information systems, vol. ISAS-1, Barcelona, Spain, 12–16 June 2008, pp. 120–128 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wautelet, Y., Kolp, M.: Business and model-driven development of BDI multi-agent systems. Neurocomputing 182, 304–321 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wautelet, Y., Heng, S., Kiv, S., Kolp, M.: User-story driven development of multi-agent systems: a process fragment for agile methods. Comput. Lang. Syst. Struct. 50, 159–176 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wautelet, Y., Kolp, M., Heng, S., Poelmans, S.: Developing a multi-agent platform supporting patient hospital stays following a socio-technical approach: management and governance benefits. Telematics Inform. 35(4), 854–882 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.12.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wautelet, Y., Kolp, M., Penserini, L.: Service-driven iterative software project management with i-tropos. J. UCS 24(7), 975–1011 (2018). https://www.jucs.org/jucs_24_7/service_driven_iterative_software
  33. 33.
    Wilson, J.M.: Business processes: modelling and analysis for re-engineering and improvement. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 47(4), 595–596 (1996)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yoshino, M., Rangan, U.S.: Strategic alliances : an entrepreneurial approach to globalization. Harvard Business School Press (1995)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yu, E.: Modeling strategic relationships for process reengineering, chap. 1–2, pp. 1–153. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.KU LeuvenBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.UCLouvainLouvian-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations