Advertisement

Deriving SOA Evaluation Metrics in an Enterprise Architecture Context

  • Stephan Aier
  • Maximilian Ahrens
  • Matthias Stutz
  • Udo Bub
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4907)

Abstract

Service oriented architectures (SOA) are becoming reality in a corporate environment. Rather than pure technology improvements SOA intends to increase manageability and sustainability of IT systems and to better align business requirements and technology implementations. Following these intentions current SOA research is focused on the management of SOA. In this paper we present a method to identify metrics for an evaluation of SOA. Therefore we adopted the goal/question/metrics method to SOA specifics. Since SOA is not limited to questions of technology we will show where SOA might be located in an enterprise architecture (EA) context. Based on the assumption that SOA follows different goals on different levels of EA abstraction, the paper shows, how these goals can be developed to metrics which can be consolidated in a measurement program.

References

  1. 1.
    Vasconcelos, A., Sousa, P., Tribolet, J.: Information System Architecture Metrics: An Enterprise Engineering Evaluation Approach. In: The 13th European Conference on Information Technology Evaluation (ECITE 2006) (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hevner, A.R., et al.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gold, N., et al.: Understanding Service-Oriented Software. IEEE Software 21(2), 71–77 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W3C. Web Services Glossary. W3C Working Group Note (2004) [cited 02.01.2005], http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/NOTE-ws-gloss-20040211
  5. 5.
    Rabhi, F.A., et al.: A service-oriented architecture for financial business processes. Information Systems And E-Business Management 5(2), 185–200 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luftman, J.N., McLean, E.R.: Key Issues for IT Executives. MIS Quarterly Executive 3(2), 89–104 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lankhorst, M.: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Open Group, TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Framework) Version 8.1 Enterprise edn., San Francisco, CA (2003) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    CIO-Council. Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework Version 1.1 (1999) [cited 31.10.2006], http://www.cio.gov/archive/fedarch1.pdf
  10. 10.
    Winter, R., Fischer, R.: Essential Layers, Artifacts, and Dependencies of Enterprise Architecture. Journal of Enterprise Architecture 3(2), 7–18 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Winter, R., Fischer, R.: Essential Layers, Artifacts, and Dependencies of Enterprise Architecture. In: EDOC Workshop on Trends in Enterprise Architecture Research (TEAR 2006). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schelp, J., Winter, R.: Towards a Methodology for Service Construction. In: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS-40). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Österle, H.: Business in the Information Age - Heading for New Processes. Springer, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yusuf, Y.Y., Sarhadi, M., Gunasekaran, A.: Agile manufacturing: the drivers, concepts and attributes. International Journal of Production Economics 62(1-2), 33–43 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    DiMare, J.: Serviceoriented architecture: A practical guide to measuring return on investment (2006) [cited 24.05.2007], http://www-935.ibm.com/services/de/bcs/pdf/2007/soa_practical_guide.pdf
  16. 16.
    Barnes, M.: Applied SOA: Measuring Business Value (2006) [cited 24.05.2007], http://www.gartner.com/teleconferences/attributes/attr_150040_115.pdf
  17. 17.
    Son, S., Weitzel, T., Laurent, F.: Designing a Process-Oriented Framework for IT Performance Management Systems. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation 8(3), 219–228 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson, P., et al.: Extended Influence Diagrams for Enterprise Architectural Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Annual Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vasconcelos, A., et al.: An information system architectural framework for enterprise application integration. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2004). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khaddaj, S., Horgan, G.: The Evaluation of Software Quality Factors in Very Large Information Systems. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation 7(1), 43–48 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gammelgård, M., et al.: Business Value Evaluation of IT Systems: Developing a Functional Reference Model. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER 2006). INCOSE, Los Angeles (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mooney, J.G., Gurbaxani, V., Kraemer, K.L.: A process oriented framework for assessing the business value of information technology. ACM SIGMIS Database 27(2), 68–81 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Basili, V.R., Weiss, D.M.: A Methodology for Collecting Valid Software Engineering Data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 10(6) (1984)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Latum, F., et al.: Adopting GQM based measurement in an industrial environment. IEEE Software 15(1), 78–86 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Aier
    • 1
  • Maximilian Ahrens
    • 2
  • Matthias Stutz
    • 1
  • Udo Bub
    • 2
  1. 1.University of St.GallenSwitzerland
  2. 2.Deutsche Telekom LaboratoriesGermany

Personalised recommendations