Abstract
A critical component of any information infrastructure is a common understanding of the enterprise. Enterprise models enable this common understanding. The enterprise model can provide a comprehensive understanding of the environment the information infrastructure is designed to support. Models are typically developed from one of five perspectives or views. The different model views are presented and a comparison of these views is discussed. These five views are: business rule, activity, business process, resource, and organization views. The primary concern in this research is the identification of the issues of multiple views of an enterprise or system. Most project managers do not consider the issues pertaining to a multiple view model of a system. These managers develop and even maintain multiple types of models for different purposes. These multiple types of models are generally developed on an ad hoc basis. By understanding the issues relating to maintaining multiple views of an enterprise, the benefits of multiple views can be realized while minimizing its difficulties. Three approaches to integrating multiple views are explained and their relative shortcomings are discussed.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Curtis, B., M. I. Kellner, et al. (1992). “Process Modeling.” Communications of the ACM 35 (9): 75–90.
Marca, D. A. and C. L. McGowan (1988). SADT: Structured Analysis and Design Technique. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.
Miller, J. (1978). Living Systems. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Nathan, B. and J. Wood (1991). The use of IDEFO to Document a methodology - aNovices Point of View, Automation & Robotics Research Institute, Fort Worth, Texas.
Presley, A., B. Huff, et al. (1993). A Comprehensive Enterprise Model for Small Manufacturers. 2nd Industrial Engineering Research Conference, Los Angeles, CA.
Presley, A. R. (1997). A Representation Method to Support Enterprise Engineering. Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering. Arlington, University of Texas at Arlington.
Reimann, M. D. and J. Sarkis (1996). “An integrated functional representation ofconcurrent engineering.” Production Planning and Control 7 (5): 452–461.
Rumbaugh, J., M. Blaha, et al. (1991). Object-Oriented Modeling and Design.Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
Scheer, A.-W. (1994). Business Process Engineering: Reference Models for Industrial Enterprises. Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
Snodgrass, B. N. (1993). Integrating Activity Based Costing with IDEF Modeling. Dallas.
Sowa, J. F. and J. A. Zachman (1992). “Extending and Formalizing the Framework for Information Systems Architecture.” IBM Systems Journal 31 (3): 590–616.
Vernadat, F. (1992). CIMOSA — A European Development for Enterprise Integration Part 2 Enterprise Modelling. Enterprise Integration Modeling: Proceedings of the First International Conference, Austin, TX, The MIT Press.
Whitman, L. E. and B. L. Huff (1997). A Living Enterprise Model. The Sixth Industrial Engineering Research Conference, Miami Beach, FL.
Zachman, J. A. (1987). “ A Framework for Information Systems Architecture.” IBM Systems Journal 26 (3): 276–292.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Whitman, L.E., Huff, B.L., Presley, A.R. (1999). The needs and issues associated with representing and integrating multiple views of the enterprise. In: Mills, J.J., Kimura, F. (eds) Information Infrastructure Systems for Manufacturing II. DIISM 1998. IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing, vol 16. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35385-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35385-2_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-5477-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-35385-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive