Developing Families of Method-Oriented Architecture

  • Mohsen Asadi
  • Bardia Mohabbati
  • Dragan Gašević
  • Ebrahim Bagheri
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 351)


The method engineering paradigm is motivated by the need for software development methods suitable for specific situations and requirements of organizations in general and projects in particular. Assembly-based method engineering, as one of the prominent approaches in method engineering, creates project-specific methods by (re-)using method components, specified with method processes and products, and stored in method repositories. This paper tries to address the two challenges of assembly-based method engineering related to more effective: i) publication and sharing of method components; and ii) management of variability in software methods, which have many commonalties. In order to address these two challenges, we propose the concept of Families of Method-Oriented Architectures. This concept is built on top of the principles of service-oriented architectures and software product lines.


Method engineering Software Product Lines SOA 


  1. 1.
    Rolland, C.: Method engineering: towards methods as services Software Process. Improvement and Practice 14(3), 143–164 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schmid, K.: A comprehensive product line scoping approach and its validation. In: Proc. of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 593–603 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harmsen, A.F.: Situational Method Engineering. Moret Ernst & Young, Utrecht (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lings, B., Lundell, B.: Method-in-action and method-in-tool: some implications for case. In: Proc. 6th Int’l Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 623–628 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Welke, R.J., Kumar, K.: Method Engineering: a proposal for situation-specific methodology construction. In: Cotterman, W.W., Senn, J.A. (eds.), pp. 257–268. Wiley, Chichester (1992)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ralyté, J., Deneckére, R., Rolland, C.: Towards a generic model for situational method engineering. In: Eder, J., Missikoff, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2681, pp. 95–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ralyté, J., Rolland, C.: An assembly process model for method engineering. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M.C. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 267–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karlsson, F., Gerfalk, P.J.A.: Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Inf. and Soft. Technology. 46(9), 619–633 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ralyte, J.: Requirements definition for the situational method engineering. In: Proc. of the IFIP WG8.1 Working Conf. on Eng. Inf. Sys. in the Internet Context, pp. 127–152 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coulin, C., Zowghi, D., Sahraoui, A.E.K.: A Lightweight Workshop-Centric Situational Approach for the Early Stages of Requirements Elicitation in Software Systems Developme. In: Proc. of Workshop on Situational Requirements Eng. Processes (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Czarnecki, K., et al.: Staged Configuration through Specialization and Multi-level Configuration of Feature Models. Soft. Process: Improvement & Prac. 10(2), 143–169 (2005)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tsai, W.: Service-oriented system engineering: a new paradigm. Service-Oriented System Engineering. In: Proc. IEEE Int’l Workshop on Service-Oriented Sys. Eng., pp. 3–6 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deneckère, R., Iacovelli, A., Kornyshova, E., Souveyet, C.: From Method Fragments to Method Services. In: Proc. 13th Int’l Conf. on Exploring Modelling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design, pp. 81–96 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klusch, M.: Semantic Web Service Coordination. In: CASCOM: Intelligent Service Coordination in the Semantic Web, pp. 59–104 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mohabbati, B., Kaviani, N., Lea, R., Gašević, D., Hatala, M., Blackstock, M.: ReCoIn: A Framework for Dynamic Integration of Remote Services in a Service-Oriented Component Model. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Asia-Pacific Services Comp. Conf. (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mirbel, I., Ralyte, J.: Situational method engineering: combining assembly-based and roadmap-driven approaches. Requirements Engineering 11(1), 58–78 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim, S., Min, H.G., Her, J.S., Chang, S.H.: DREAM: A practical product line engineering using model driven architecture. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Information Technology and Applications, pp. 70–75 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Montero, I., Pena, J., Ruiz-Cortes, A.: From Feature Models to Business Processes. In: Proc. of the IEEE Int’l Conf. on Services Computing, vol. 2, pp. 605–608 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bošković, et al.: Automated Staged Configuration with Semantic Web Technologies. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (in press, 2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    OPEN Process Framework (OPF) Web Site,
  21. 21.
    Gonzalez-Perez, C.: Supporting Situational Method Engineering with ISO/IEC 24744 and the Work Product Pool Approach. SME: Fundamentals and Experiences, pp. 7-18 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Aharoni, A., Reinhartz-Berger, I.: A Domain Engineering Approach for Situational Method Engineering. In: Li, Q., Spaccapietra, S., Yu, E., Olivé, A. (eds.) ER 2008. LNCS, vol. 5231, pp. 455–468. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osterweil, L.: Software processes are software too. In: Proceedings of the ICSE, pp. 2–13. IEEE Computer Society Press, Monterey (1987)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clements, P., Northrop, L.M.: Software product lines visited June 2010 (2003),
  25. 25.
    Asadi, M., Ramsin, R.: Patterns of Situational Method Engineering. In: Lee, R., Ishii, N. (eds.) Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA) 2009. SCI, vol. 253, pp. 277–291. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohsen Asadi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bardia Mohabbati
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dragan Gašević
    • 2
  • Ebrahim Bagheri
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Simon Fraser UniversityCanada
  2. 2.Athabasca UniversityCanada
  3. 3.National Research CouncilCanada

Personalised recommendations