Development of a Modeling Language for Capability Driven Development: Experiences from Meta-modeling

  • Janis StirnaEmail author
  • Jelena Zdravkovic
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9974)


Changing business environments related to constant variations in customers’ demand, situational conditions, regulations, emerging security threats, etc. may be addressed by approaches that integrate organizational development with information system development taking into account changes in the application context. This paper presents experiences from Method Engineering of the Capability Driven Development (CDD) methodology with a focus on the CDD meta-model and the modeling activities that led to it. CDD consists of several method components. Hence, a conceptual meta-model of CDD and a meta-model of the modeling language based on the 4EM approach are presented together with a number of lessons learned.


Method engineering Meta-modeling Enterprise Modeling Capability driven development 


  1. 1.
    EU FP7 CaaS Project: Capability as a service for digital enterprises, proj. no. 611351.
  2. 2.
    Ulrich, W., Rosen, M.: The business capability map: building a foundation for business/it alignment. Cutter Consortium for Business and Enterprise Architecture (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bērziša, S., Bravos, G., Gonzalez, T., Czubayko, U., España, S., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Jokste, L., Kampars, J., Koc, H., Kuhr, J., Llorca, C., Loucopoulos, P., Juanes, R., Sandkuhl, K., Simic, H., Stirna, J., Zdravkovic, J.: Deliverable D1.4: requirements specification for CDD. CaaS – Capability as a Service for Digital Enterprises, FP7 proj. 611351, Riga Technical University (2014).
  4. 4.
    Bērziša, S., España, S., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Jokste, L., Kampars, J., Koç, H., Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Valverde, F., Zdravkovic J.: Deliverable 5.2: the initial version of capability driven development methodology, FP7 proj. 611351. CaaS – Capability as a Service in digital enterprises, Stockholm University (2015). doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2399.4965
  5. 5.
    Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., Wißotzki, M.: Enterprise Modeling – Tackling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). ISBN 978-3-662-43724-7SGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inform. Softw. Tech. 38(4), 275–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smolander, K.: OPRR: a model for modelling systems development methods. In: Lyytinen, K., Tahvanainen, V.-P. (eds.) Next Generation CASE tools. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1991)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bergsten, P., Bubenko, J., Dahl, R., Gustafsson, M.R., Johansson, L.A.: RAMATIC - A CASE Shell for Implementation of Specific CASE Tools. SISU, Stockholm (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ralyté, J., Backlund, P., Kühn, H., Jeusfeld, M.A.: Method chunks for interoperability. In: Embley, D.W., Olivé, A., Ram, S. (eds.) ER 2006. LNCS, vol. 4215, pp. 339–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldkuhl, G., Lind, M., Seigerroth, U.: Method integration: the need for a learning perspective. IEEE Proc. Softw. 145(4), 113–118 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    OMG: OMG Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification, Version 2.5 (2015).

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer and Systems SciencesStockholm UniversityKistaSweden

Personalised recommendations