Towards Deterministically Constructing Organizations Based on the Normalized Systems Approach

  • Dieter Van Nuffel
  • Philip Huysmans
  • David Bellens
  • Kris Ven
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6105)

Abstract

Contemporary organizations need to be more agile to keep up with the swiftly changing business environment. This means that their organizational structure, business processes and information systems should evolve at the same pace. This proves to be quite a challenge due to the invasive nature of these changes and a lack of alignment between these artefacts. It has therefore been argued that more determinism is needed when engineering these artefacts. Recently, the normalized systems approach has been proposed to design information systems exhibiting proven evolvability. In this paper, we extend the approach’s basic principles to the related fields of Enterprise Architecture (EA) and Business Process Management (BPM). This study is part of ongoing design science research to incorporate determinism in the construction of an organization’s artefacts. Our results show that such approach is feasible and could increase traceability from the organizational level to the information systems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baskerville, R.L., Wood-Harper, A.T.: A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of Information Technology 11(3), 235–246 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C., Hull, R., Liu, R., Su, J.: Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 288–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chesbrough, H., Spohrer, J.: A Research Manifesto for Services Science. Communications of the ACM 49(7), 35–40 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cleven, A., Gubler, P., Hüner, K.M.: Design Alternatives for the Evaluation of Design Science Research Artifacts. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2009). ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Backer, M., Snoeck, M., Monsieur, G., Lemahieu, W., Dedene, G.: A scenario-based verification technique to assess the compatibility of collaborative business processes. Data and Knowledge Engineering 68(6), 531–551 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dietz, J.L.: The deep structure of business processes. Communications of the ACM 49(5), 58–64 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dietz, J.L.: Enterprise Ontology: Theory and Methodology. Springer, Berlin (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eick, S.G., Graves, T.L., Karr, A.F., Marron, J., Mockus, A.: Does Code Decay? Assessing the Evidence from Change Management Data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 27(1), 1–12 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: What business process modelers can learn from programmers. Science of Computer Programming 65(1), 4–13 (2007)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holmström, J., Ketokivi, M., Hameri, A.P.: Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach. Decision Sciences 40(1), 65–87 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klahr, D., Simon, H.A.: Studies of scientific discovery: Complementary approaches and convergent findings. Psychological Bulletin 125(5), 524–543 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kozina, M.: Evaluation of ARIS and Zachman Frameworks as Enterprise Architectures. Journal of Information and Organization Sciences 30(1) (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Op ’t Land, M., Proper, E., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: Enterprise Architecture: Creating Value by Informed Governance, 1st edn. The Enterprise Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lankhorst, M.M.: Enterprise architecture modelling–the issue of integration. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18(4), 205–216 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehman, M.: Programs, life cycles, and laws of software evolution. Proceedings of the IEEE 68, 1060–1076 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lehman, M.M., Ramil, J.F.: Rules and Tools for Software Evolution Planning and Management. Annals of Software Engineering 11(1), 15–44 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leist, S., Zellner, G.: Evaluation of current architecture frameworks. In: SAC 2006: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pp. 1546–1553. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mannaert, H., Verelst, J.: Normalized Systems: Re-creating Information Technology Based on Laws for Software Evolvability. Koppa, Hasselt (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mannaert, H., Verelst, J., Ven, K.: Exploring the Concept of Systems Theoretic Stability as a Starting Point for a Unified Theory on Software Engineering. In: Mannaert, H., Ohta, T., Dini, C., Pellerin, R. (eds.) Proceedings of Third International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2008), pp. 360–366. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7pmg). Information and Software Technology 52(2), 127–136 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Middleton, P., Harper, K.: Organizational alignment: a precondition for information systems success? Journal of Change Management 4(4), 327–338 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neumann, S.: Strategic Information Systems: Competition Through Information Technologies. Macmillan College Publishing Company, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parnas, D.L.: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Communications of the ACM 15(12), 1053–1058 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(3), 45–77 (2007–2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pereira, C.M., Sousa, P.: A Method to define an Enterprise Architecture using the Zachman Framework. In: SAC 2004: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pp. 1366–1371. ACM, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ross, J.W., Weill, P., Robertson, D.C.: Enterprise Architecture as Strategy – Creating a Foundation for Business Execution. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A.S., Grover, V.: Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms. MIS Quarterly 27(2), 237–263 (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schekkerman, J.: How to survive in the jungle of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks. Trafford, Victoria (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Silver, B.: BPMN: Method and Style. Cody-Cassidy Press, Aptos (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Van Nuffel, D., Mannaert, H., De Backer, C., Verelst, J.: Deriving Normalized Systems elements from business process models. In: Boness, K. (ed.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, pp. 27–32. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Winter, R.: Guest editorial - Design Science Research in Europe. European Journal of Information Systems 17(5), 470–475 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zachman, J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Sys. J. 26(3), 276–292 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhao, J.L., Tanniru, M., Zhang, L.J.: Services computing as the foundation of enterprise agility: Overview of recent advances and introduction to the special issue. Information Systems Frontiers 9(1), 1–8 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dieter Van Nuffel
    • 1
  • Philip Huysmans
    • 1
  • David Bellens
    • 1
  • Kris Ven
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management Information SystemsUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations