Strategies for Capability Modelling: Analysis Based on Initial Experiences

  • Sergio España
  • Jānis Grabis
  • Martin HenkelEmail author
  • Hasan Koç
  • Kurt Sandkuhl
  • Janis Stirna
  • Jelena Zdravkovic
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 215)


Competitiveness and growth on an international market is for many businesses tightly coupled to their ability of quickly implementing new company strategies, business services and products or market entries. Capability management is among the approaches proposed to tackle these challenges. A feature is capturing the context of capability delivery and providing mechanisms for configuring the delivery. Among the work on capability management is the capability-driven design and delivery (CDD) approach that has been proposed by the EU-FP7 project CaaS. The aim of this paper is to contribute to CDD by (i) introducing different strategies for capability modelling, (ii) elaborating on the differences between these strategies, and (iii) contributing to an understanding of what strategy should be used under what preconditions. The paper addresses these aspects by describing the strategies and initial experiences gathered with them.


Capability modelling Capability management Goal-first strategy Process-first strategy Concept-first strategy 



This work has been performed as part of the EU-FP7 funded project no: 611351 CaaS – Capability as a Service in Digital Enterprises.


  1. 1.
    Jiang, Y., Zhao, J.: An empirical research of the forming process of firm inter-organizational e-business capability: based on the supply chain processes. In: 2010 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Engineering (ICISE), pp 2603–2606 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antunes, G., Barateiro, J., Becker, C., et al.: Modeling contextual concerns in enterprise architecture. In: 2011 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW), pp 3–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eriksson, T.: Processes, antecedents and outcomes of dynamic capabilities. Scand. J. Manage. 15(2), 142–155 (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2013.05.001 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boonpattarakan, A.: Model of Thai small and medium sized enterprises’ organizational capabilities: review and verification. JMR 4(3), 1–28 (2012). doi: 10.5296/jmr.v4i3.1557 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stirna, J., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Zdravkovic, J.: Capability driven development – an approach to support evolving organizations. In: Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U., Stirna, J. (eds.) PoEM 2012. LNBIP, vol. 134, pp. 117–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, J., Tsou, H.: Performance effects of 5IT6 capability, service process innovation, and the mediating role of customer service. J. Eng. Tech. Manage. 29(1), 71–94 (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2011.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loucopoulos, P., Kavakli, V., Prekas, N., Rolland, C., Grosz, G., Nurcan, S.: Using the EKD approach: the modelling component (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bubenko, J.A.J., Persson, A. Stirna, J.: User Guide of the Knowledge Management Approach Using Enterprise Knowledge Patterns. Deliverable D3 IST Programme project Hypermedia and Pattern Based Knowledge Management for Smart Organisations, Project no. IST-2000-28401 (2001). Accessed February 2015
  9. 9.
    Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., Wißotzki, M.: Enterprise Modeling – Tackling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). ISBN 978-3-662-43724-7Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brézillon, P., Cavalcanti, M.: Modeling and using context. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 13(2), 185–194 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: The Provop approach. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution 22(6–7), 519–546 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Milani, F., Dumas, M., Ahmed, N., Matulevicius, R.: Modelling Families of Business Process Variants: A Decomposition Driven Method, CoRR abs/1311.1322 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bērziša, S., Bravos, G., Gonzalez Cardona, T., Czubayko, U., España, S., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Jokste, L., Kampars, J., Koc, H., Kuhr, J., Llorca, C., Loucopoulos, P., Juanes Pascual, R., Sandkuhl, K., Simic, H., Stirna, J., Zdravkovic, J.: Deliverable 1.4: Requirements specification for CDD, CaaS – Capability as a Service for Digital Enterprises, FP7 project no 611351, Riga Technical University, Latvia (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sandkuhl, K., Koç, H., Stirna, J.: Context-aware business services: technological support for business and IT-alignment. In: Abramowicz, W., Kokkinaki, A. (eds.) BIS 2014 Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 183, pp. 190–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bērziša, S., Bravos, G., Gonzalez Cardona, T., Czubayko, U., España, S., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Jokste, L., Kampars, J., Koç, H., Kuhr, J.-C., Llorca, C., Loucopoulos, P., Juanes Pascual, R., Pastor, O., Sandkuhl, K., Simic, H., Stirna, J., Zdravkovic, J.: Capability Driven Development: An Approach to Designing Digital Enterprises. Business and Information Systems Engineering (BISE), February 2015. doi: 10.1007/s12599-014-0362-0

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio España
    • 1
  • Jānis Grabis
    • 2
  • Martin Henkel
    • 3
    Email author
  • Hasan Koç
    • 4
  • Kurt Sandkuhl
    • 4
  • Janis Stirna
    • 3
  • Jelena Zdravkovic
    • 3
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Riga Technical UniversityRigaLatvia
  3. 3.Stockholm UniversityStockholmSweden
  4. 4.University of RostockRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations