Capability-Driven Development

A Novel Approach to Design Enterprise Capabilities
  • Hasan KoçEmail author
  • Jan-Christian Kuhr
  • Kurt Sandkuhl
  • Felix Timm
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 111)


Technological advances, changes in regulations and increasing globalization of the economy demand high adaptability from enterprises in many areas. Enterprise Architecture Management provides organizations with an integrated view enabling such adaptability. In this respect, development and management of the capabilities receive attention, as the term is associated with flexibility, dynamics and variation. On the contrary, little effort has been put towards developing and modeling capabilities. This chapter focuses on the Capability-Driven Development (CDD) method, which is a novel approach for designing capabilities to tackle the challenges of rapidly changing enterprise environments by modeling the application context. The results presented in this chapter are (i) a description of the state of research in capability development methods, (ii) a component-wise structured capability modeling method based on business processes, goals and concepts of an enterprise, (iii) a demonstration of the method application in a use case from the utilities industry and (iv) observations made during the capability development and strategy use.


  1. 1.
    Goebel, C., Jacobsen, H., del Razo, V., et al.: Energy Informatics. Bus. Inf. Syst Eng 6(1), 25–31 (2014). doi: 10.1007/s12599-013-0304-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    España, S., González, T., Grabis, J., et al.: Capability-driven development of a SOA platform: a case study. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops, LNBIP Vol. 178. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 100–111 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bērziša, S., Bravos, G., Gonzalez, T., et al.: Capability driven development: an approach to designing digital enterprises. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 57(1), 15–25 (2015). doi: 10.1007/s12599-014-0362-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bravos, G., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., et al.: Supporting evolving organizations: IS development methodology goals. In: Perspectives in Business Informatics Research, LNBIP, vol. 194, pp. 158–171. Springer International Publishing (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zdravkovic, J., Stirna, J., Kuhr, J., et al.: Requirements engineering for capability driven development. In: The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, LNBIP, vol. 197, pp. 193–207. Springer, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oxenham, D.: The next great challenges in systems thinking: a defence perspective. Civil Eng. Environ. Syst. 27(3), 231–241 (2010). doi: 10.1080/10286608.2010.482661 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boonpattarakan, A.: Model of Thai small and medium sized enterprises’ organizational capabilities: review and verification. JMR 4(3), (2012). doi: 10.5296/jmr.v4i3.1557
  8. 8.
    BKCASE Editorial Board: The guide to the systems engineering body of knowledge (SEBoK), v. 1.3. R.D. Adcock (EIC). The Trustees of the Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ (2014). Accessed 12 July 2015. BKCASE is managed and maintained by the Stevens Institute of Technology Systems Engineering Research Center, the International Council on Systems Engineering, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Computer Society
  9. 9.
    Sandkuhl, K., Koç, H., Stirna, J.: Context-aware business services: technological support for business and IT-alignment. In: Business Information Systems Workshops, LNBIP, vol. 183, pp. 190–201. Springer International Publishing (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stirna, J., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., et al.: Capability driven development—an approach to support evolving organizations. In: The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, LNBIP, vol. 134, pp. 117–131. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    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
  12. 12.
    Ahlemann, F., Stettiner, E., Messerschmidt, M., et al.: Strategic Enterprise Architecture Management. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Antunes, G., Barateiro. J., Becker, C., et al.: Modeling contextual concerns in enterprise architecture. In: 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW), pp. 3–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wißotzki, M., Koç, H., Weichert, T., et al.: Development of an Enterprise Architecture Management Capability Catalog. In: Perspectives in Business Informatics Research, LNBIP, vol. 158, pp. 112–126. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lacity, M.C., Khan, S.A., Willcocks, L.P.: A review of the IT outsourcing literature: insights for practice. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 18(3), 130–146 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2009.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dey, A.: Understanding and using context. Pers Ubiquitous Comput. 5(1), 4–7 (2001). doi: 10.1007/s007790170019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Winograd, T.: Architectures for Context. Human-Comp. Interact. 16(2), 401–419 (2001). doi: 10.1207/S15327051HCI16234_18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bazire, M., Brézillon, P.: Understanding context before using it. In: Modeling and Using Context, LNCS, vol, 3554, pp. 29–40. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Strang, T., Linnhoff-Popien, C.: A context modeling survey. In: Workshop on Advanced Context Modelling, Reasoning and Management, UbiComp 2004—The Sixth International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, Nottingham/England, pp 31–41 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gu, T., Wang, X.H., Pung, H.K., et al.: An ontology-based context model in intelligent environments. In: Proceedings of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems Modelling and Simulation Conference, pp. 270–275 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koç, H., Hennig, E., Jastram, S., et al.: State of the art in context modelling—a systematic literature review. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops, LNBIP, vol. 178, pp. 53–64. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., et al.: Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(1), 7–15 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schrader, U., Hennig-Thurau, T.: VHB-JOURQUAL2: method, results, and implications of the German academic association for business research’s journal ranking, 14 Mar 2010Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Peffers, K., Ya, T.: Identifying and evaluating the universe of outlets for information systems research: ranking the journals. J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. (JITTA) 5(1) (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    WI: Die Sprecher der Wissenschaftlichen Kommission Wirtschaftsinformatik im Verband der Hochschullehrer für Betriebswirtschaft und des Fachbereichs Wirtschaftsinformatik der Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI-FB WI-Orientierungslisten. Wirtschaftsinformatik 50(2), 155–163. doi: 10.1365/s11576-008-0040-2
  26. 26.
    Goldkuhl, G., Lind, M., Seigerroth, U.: Method integration: the need for a learning perspective. Softw. IEE Proc. 145(4), 113–118 (1998). doi: 10.1049/ip-sen:19982197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koç, H.: Methods in designing and developing capabilities: a systematic mapping study. In: The Practice of Enterprise Modelling, LNBIP, vol. 235, pp. 209–222. Springer International Publishing (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Niehaves, B., Plattfaut, R., Sarker, S.: Understanding dynamic IS capabilities for effective process change: a theoretical framework and an empirical application. ICIS 2011 Proceedings (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ortbach, K., Plattfaut, R., Poppelbuß, J., et al.: A dynamic capability-based framework for business process management: theorizing and empirical application. In: 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 4287–4296 (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cui, M., Pan, S.L.: Developing focal capabilities for e-commerce adoption: a resource orchestration perspective. Inf. Manag. 52(2), 200–209 (2015). doi: 10.1016/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Montealegre, R.: A process model of capability development: lessons from the electronic commerce strategy at Bolsa de Valores de Guayaquil. Organ. Sci. 13(5), 514–531 (2002). doi: 10.1287/orsc.13.5.514.7808 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhou, J., Zuo, M., Li, Q., et al.: Developing an agile it capability accompanying business’s fast growing: a case study on a Chinese e-commerce company Ho Chi Minh City. In: PACIS 2012 Proceedings, Paper 24 (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Su, N.: Internationalization strategies of IT vendors from emerging economies: the case of China. In: ICIS 2008 Proceedings. Paper 96 (2008)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    España, S., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., et al.: Strategies for capability modelling: analysis based on initial experiences. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops, LNBIP, vol. 215, pp. 40–52. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2015)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., et al.: Enterprise Modeling: Tackling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zdravkovic, J., Stirna, J., Henkel, M., et al.: Modeling business capabilities and context dependent delivery by cloud services. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering, LNCS, vol. 7908, pp. 369–383. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hasan Koç
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jan-Christian Kuhr
    • 2
  • Kurt Sandkuhl
    • 1
  • Felix Timm
    • 1
  1. 1.Chair of Business Information SystemsInstitute of Computer Science, The University of RostockRostockGermany
  2. 2.SIV Software-Architektur & Technologie GmbHRoggentinGermany

Personalised recommendations