Abstract
Enterprise Architecture modeling languages describe an enterprise holistically, showing its business products and services and how these are realized by IT infrastructure and applications. However, these modeling languages lack the capability to capture the design rationale for decisions that lead to specific architectural designs. In our previous work we presented the EA Anamnesis approach for capturing architectural decision details. In this paper, we extend the EA Anamnesis approach with a viewpoint that captures and rationalizes decision making strategies in enterprise architecture. Such a viewpoint is useful because it helps enterprise architects reconstruct the decision making process leading up to a decision and understand how and under which circumstances this decision was made. For example, under time pressure an architect may rely on heuristics instead of examining the decision problem in depth. More specifically, we contribute: (1) a metamodel for capturing decision making strategies, which is grounded in established decision making literature, (2) an illustrative example showcasing the potential usefulness of capturing the decision making process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Op’t Land, M., Proper, E., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: Enterprise architecture: creating value by informed governance. Springer (2008)
Hoogervorst, J.: Enterprise architecture: Enabling integration, agility and change. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 13(03), 213–233 (2004)
Lankhorst, M.: Enterprise architecture at work: Modelling, communication and analysis. Springer (2009)
The Open Group: ArchiMate 2.0 Specification. Van Haren Publishing (2012)
Jansen, A., Bösch, J.: Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA 2005, pp. 109–120. IEEE (2005)
Tang, A., Jin, Y., Han, J.: A rationale-based architecture model for design traceability and reasoning. Journal of Systems and Software 80(6), 918–934 (2007)
Tang, A., Babar, M.A., Gorton, I., Han, J.: A survey of architecture design rationale. Journal of Systems and Software 79(12), 1792–1804 (2006)
Plataniotis, G., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A.: Ea anamnesis: towards an approach for enterprise architecture rationalization. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling, DSM 2012, pp. 27–32. ACM, New York (2012)
Lee, J.: Extending the potts and bruns model for recording design rationale. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 114–125. IEEE (1991)
Einhorn, H.: The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin 73(3), 221 (1970)
Payne, J.: Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16(2), 366–387 (1976)
Svenson, O.: Process descriptions of decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 23(1), 86–112 (1979)
Alenljung, B., Persson, A.: Portraying the practice of decision-making in requirements engineering: a case of large scale bespoke development. Requirements Engineering 13(4), 257–279 (2008)
Orasanu, J., Connolly, T.: The reinvention of decision making (1993)
Rothrock, L., Yin, J.: Integrating compensatory and noncompensatory decision-making strategies in dynamic task environments. Decision Modeling and Behavior in Complex and Uncertain Environments, 125–141 (2008)
Payne, J., Bettman, J., Johnson, E.: The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge University Press (1993)
Elrod, T., Johnson, R., White, J.: A new integrated model of noncompensatory and compensatory decision strategies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 95(1), 1–19 (2004)
Jeffreys, I.: The use of compensatory and non-compensatory multi-criteria analysis for small-scale forestry. Small-scale Forestry 3(1), 99–117 (2004)
McAllister, D., Mitchell, T., Beach, L.: The contingency model for the selection of decision strategies: An empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and reversibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 24(2), 228–244 (1979)
Ruhe, G.: Software engineering decision support: methodology and applications
Regnell, B., Paech, B., Aurum, A., Wohlin, C., Dutoit, A.: Requirements mean decisions!–research issues for understanding and supporting decision-making in requirements engineering. In: First Swedish Conference on Software Engineering Research and Practise: Proceedings. Citeseer (2001)
Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J., Finkelstein, A.: A framework for expressing the relationships between multiple views in requirements specification. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20(10), 760–773 (1994)
IEEE: Systems and software engineering – architecture description. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011(E) (Revision of ISO/IEC 42010:2007 and IEEE Std 1471-2000), 1–46 (January 2011)
Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D., Theoret, A.: The structure of unstructured decision processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 246–275 (1976)
Cummins, J., Doherty, N.: The economics of insurance intermediaries. Journal of Risk and Insurance 73(3), 359–396 (2006)
Jadhav, A., Sonar, R.: Evaluating and selecting software packages: A review. Information and Software Technology 51(3), 555–563 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Plataniotis, G., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A. (2013). Capturing Decision Making Strategies in Enterprise Architecture – A Viewpoint. In: Nurcan, S., et al. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2013 2013. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 147. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38484-4_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38484-4_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-38483-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-38484-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)