Participatory Service Design through Composed and Coordinated Service Feature Models

  • Erik Wittern
  • Nelly Schuster
  • Jörn Kuhlenkamp
  • Stefan Tai
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7636)


Active participation of diverse stakeholders such as consumers or experts in service engineering is critical. It ensures that relevant aspects of service quality, service acceptance and service compliance are addressed. However, coordination of diverse stakeholder inputs is difficult and their collaborative creation of common design artifacts demands novel engineering solutions. We present a service-oriented approach for engineering design artifacts: service feature models are introduced as compositions of model parts that can be contributed by different stakeholders and software resources acting as services. Our method and tool applies service-orientation to collaborative design, thereby taking participatory service engineering to the level of coordinated service composition.


Service engineering service feature modeling coordination collaboration participatory service design 


  1. 1.
    Acher, M., Collet, P., Lahire, P., France, R.: Composing Feature Models. In: van den Brand, M., Gašević, D., Gray, J. (eds.) SLE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5969, pp. 62–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagheri, E., Ensan, F., Gasevic, D., Boskovic, M.: Modular Feature Models: Representation and Configuration. Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology 43(2), 109–140 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benavides, D., Segura, S., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Automated Analysis of Feature Models 20 Years Later: A Literature Review. Information Systems 35(6), 615–636 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benavides, D., Trinidad, P., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Automated Reasoning on Feature Models. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 491–503. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bidarra, R., Berg, E.V.D., Bronsvoort, W.F.: Collaborative Modeling with Features. In: Proc. of the 2001 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC 2001, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    COCKPIT Project: Citizens Collaboration and Co-Creation in Public Service Delivery (March 2012),
  7. 7.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Formalizing Cardinality-based Feature Models and their Specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(1), 7–29 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Staged Configuration through Specialization and Multilevel Configuration of Feature Models. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(2), 143–169 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Lucia, A., Fasano, F., Scanniello, G., Tortora, G.: Enhancing collaborative synchronous UML modelling with fine-grained versioning of software artefacts. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 18(5), 492–503 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hartman, A., Jain, A.N., Ramanathan, J., Ramfos, A., Van der Heuvel, W.-J., Zirpins, C., Tai, S., Charalabidis, Y., Pasic, A., Johannessen, T., Grønsund, T.: Participatory Design of Public Sector Services. In: Andersen, K.N., Francesconi, E., Grönlund, Å., van Engers, T.M. (eds.) EGOVIS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6267, pp. 219–233. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holmlid, S.: Participative, co-operative, emancipatory: From participatory design to service design. In: 1st Nordic Conference on Service Design and Service, Oslo, Norway (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kang, K.C., Cohen, S.G., Hess, J.A., Novak, W.E., Peterson, A.S.: Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) Feasibility Study. Tech. rep., Carnegie Mellon University (November 1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mendonça, M., Cowan, D., Malyk, W., Oliveira, T.: Collaborative Product Configuration: Formalization and Efficient Algorithms for Dependency Analysis. Journal of Software 3(2) (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Renger, M., Kolfschoten, G.L., de Vreede, G.J.: Challenges in Collaborative Modeling: A Literature Review. In: Dietz, J.L.G., Albani, A., Barjis, J. (eds.) CIAO! 2008 and EOMAS 2008. LNBIP, vol. 10, pp. 61–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schall, D., Truong, H.L., Dustdar, S.: Unifying human and software services in web-scale collaborations. IEEE Internet Computing 12(3), 62–68 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schuster, N., Zirpins, C., Scholten, U.: How to Balance between Flexibility and Coordination? Model and Architecture for Document-based Collaboration on the Web. In: Proc. on the 2011 IEEE Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications (SOCA), pp. 1–9 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schuster, N., Zirpins, C., Tai, S., Battle, S., Heuer, N.: A Service-Oriented Approach to Document-Centric Situational Collaboration Processes. In: Proc. of the 18th IEEE Int. Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises, WETICE 2009, pp. 221–226. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sonnenwald, D.H.: Communication roles that support collaboration during the design process. Design Studies 17(3), 277–301 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wittern, E., Zirpins, C.: On the Use of Feature Models for Service Design: The Case of Value Representation. In: Cezon, M., Wolfsthal, Y. (eds.) ServiceWave 2010 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 6569, pp. 110–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wittern, E., Zirpins, C., Rajshree, N., Jain, A.N., Spais, I., Giannakakis, K.: A Tool Suite to Model Service Variability and Resolve It Based on Stakeholder Preferences. In: Pallis, G., Jmaiel, M., Charfi, A., Graupner, S., Karabulut, Y., Guinea, S., Rosenberg, F., Sheng, Q.Z., Pautasso, C., Ben Mokhtar, S. (eds.) ICSOC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7221, pp. 250–251. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yu, J., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Daniel, F.: Understanding Mashup Development. IEEE Internet Computing 12(5), 44–52 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zimmermann, O., Koehler, J., Leymann, F., Polley, R., Schuster, N.: Managing Architectural Decision Models with Dependency Relations, Integrity Constraints, and Production Rules. Journal of Systems and Software 82(8), 1249–1267 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erik Wittern
    • 1
  • Nelly Schuster
    • 1
  • Jörn Kuhlenkamp
    • 1
  • Stefan Tai
    • 1
  1. 1.eOrganization Research GroupKarlsruhe Institute of TechnologyKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations