DOCSLIB.ORG

Enterprise Architecture for Information System Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Enterprise Architecture for Information System Analysis Modeling and assessing data accuracy, availability, performance and application usage PER NÄRMAN Doctoral Thesis Stockholm, Sweden 2012 TRITA-EE 2012:035 Industrial Information and Control Systems ISSN 1653-5146 KTH, Royal Institute of Technology ISRN KTH/ICS/R--12/01--SE Stockholm, Sweden Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy © Per Närman, September 2012, Copyrighted articles are reprinted with kind permission from El- sevier and Taylor & Francis. Universitetsservice US AB Abstract Decisions concerning IT systems are often made without adequate decision-support. This has led to unnecessary IT costs and failures to realize business benefits. The present thesis presents a framework for analysis of four information systems properties relevant to IT decision-making. The work is founded on enterprise architecture, a model-based IT and business management discipline. Based on the existing ArchiMate framework, a new enterprise architecture framework has been developed and implemented in a software tool. The framework supports modeling and analysis of data accuracy, service performance, service availability and application usage. To analyze data accuracy, data flows are modeled, the service availability analysis uses fault tree analysis, the performance analysis employs queuing networks and the application usage analysis combines the Technology Acceptance Model and Task-Technology Fit model. The accuracy of the framework’s estimates was empirically tested. Data accuracy and service performance were evaluated in studies at the same power utility. Service availability was tested in multiple studies at banks and power utilities. Data was collected through interviews with system development or maintenance staff. The application usage model was tested in the maintenance management domain. Here, data was collected by means of a survey answered by 55 respondents from three power utilities, one manufacturing company and one nuclear power plant. The service availability studies provided estimates that were accurate within a few hours of logged yearly downtime. The data accuracy estimate was correct within a percentage point when compared to a sample of data objects. Deviations for four out of five service performance estimates were within 15 % from measured values. The application usage analysis explained a high degree of variation in application usage when applied to the maintenance management domain. During the studies of data accuracy, service performance and service availability, records were kept concerning the required modeling and analysis effort. The estimates were obtained with a total effort of about 20 man-hours per estimate. In summary the framework should be useful for IT decision-makers requiring fairly accurate, but not too expensive, estimates of the four properties. Keywords: Enterprise Architecture, Metamodeling, Decision-making, Data Accuracy, Service Availability, Service Performance, Technology Acceptance Model, Task Technology Fit iii Sammanfattning Beslut rörande IT fattas ofta med otillräckligt beslutsunderlag. Detta leder till onödigt höga IT- kostnader och svårigheter att realisera IT-nyttor. Denna avhandling presenterar ett ramverk för ana- lys av IT-systemegenskaper av intresse för IT-beslutsfattare. Enterprise Architecture är en modellbaserad disciplin för IT- och verksamhetsutveckling och utgör grunden för denna avhandling. Baserat på ramverket ArchiMate har ett nytt arkitekturramverk utvecklats och implementerats i ett verktyg. Ramverket kan användas för att modellera och analysera datakorrekthet, tjänstetillgänglighet, tjänsteprestanda och IT-systemanvändande. För att utvärdera datakorrekthet modelleras dataflöden, tillgänglighetsanalysen använder sig av felträdsanalys, prestandaanalysen baseras på köteori och systemanvändande på modellerna Techno- logy Acceptance Model och Task-Technoloy Fit. Tillförlitligheten i analysresultaten har testats empiriskt. Resultaten avseende datakorrekthet och tjänsteprestanda testades i studier på samma elbolag, tjänstetillgänglighet undersöktes i flera studier på elbolag och banker. I dessa fall samlades data in genom intervjuer med utvecklings- eller under- hållspersonal. Systemanvändande testades inom domänen underhållsstyrning genom en enkät med 55 respondenter från tre elbolag, ett tillverkningsföretag och ett kärnkraftverk. Uppskattningarna av tjänstetillgänglighet var korrekta sånär som ett fåtal timmars nertid på års- basis, datakorrekthetsuppskattningen var mindre än en procent från det mätta värdet. Fyra av fem tjänsteprestandaupps5kattningar var inom 15% från uppmätta värden. Analysen av systemanvän- dande kunde användas för att förklara en stor del av variationen av systemanvändande i underhålls- styrningsområdet. I studierna avseende datakorrekthet, tjänstetillgänglighet och tjänsteprestanda undersöktes också kostnaderna för att genomföra analyserna. Totalt krävdes det ungefär 20 timmar per uppskattning. Sammanfattningsvis bör ramverket vara användbart för praktiker som behöver relativt korrekta, men inte alltför dyra, uppskattningar av de fyra egenskaperna. Nyckelord: arkitektur, metamodellerande, beslutsfattande, datakvalitet, tillgänglighet, prestanda, systemanvändande v Acknowledgments I relied quite heavily on the help and support of a number of people whose contributions deserve acknowledgment. And since this is the Acknowledgments section, lets name them here: Torsten Cegrell was not only kind enough to hire me, but together with Judy Westerlund has created what I believe to be a uniquely rewarding working environment. Thank you both. Judy, together with Annica Johanneson also proved to be particular helpful for me when I decided to stop being a full-time employee and decided to venture out into the Real World. Pontus Johnson and Mathias Ekstedt have both provided invaluable assistance in their role of supervisors in which they have been teaching me the immense value of having a really, really good metamodel. Some of my fellow PhD students – the PERDAF posse – also put in a substantial amount of work as paper co-authors and deserve recognition for this: Hannes Holm, Ulrik Franke, Markus Buschle, David Höök, Moustafa Chenine, Johan König and Nicholas Honneth all contributed in shaping this thesis to turn out as good as it eventually did. Khurram Shahzad also made significant contributions by bringing the EAAT tool to a new level which greatly aided this work. Thank you all, I hope you enjoyed the projects as much as I did. My other dear co-workers – Mårten Simonsson, Magnus Gammelgård, Robert Lagerström, Jo- han Ullberg, Teodor Sommestad, Joakim Lilliesköld, Erik Johansson, Lars Nordström, Liv Gignell, Evelina Ericsson and everybody else at the department all deserve a big thank you for stimulating projects, courses and coffee breaks. A lot of kind people in Swedish organizations and companies volunteered their time to help me collect empirical data. I owe you all a great deal and in particular I would like to thank Ulf Larsson, Conny Peterson Edlund, Niclas Almlöv, Jalal Matini, Miguel Aguilar, Stefan Huss, Hans- Erik Carlsson, Hans Kumlin, Mauno Kamarainen, Richard Hejdenberg, Göran Ericsson and Sven- Olof Eriksson. Both my bosses at Capgemini Consulting Per-Ola Niblaeus and Ulf Larsson have been very kind and supportive about me finishing this thesis. Thank you for this, now I can focus solely on becoming a better management consultant. Mum, Dad, Kirsti and Donald have all helped by providing me with a lot of much-needed writing time during the past two years. Without you, this thesis would not be finished this soon, thank you! Finally, Pia – for all the love and patience, Wilhelm – for all the love and impatience. Thank you! Stockholm, September 2012 Per Närman vii Papers List of included papers Paper A: Per Närman, Hannes Holm, Pontus Johnson, Johan König, Moustafa Chenine, Mathias Ekstedt, "Data Accuracy Assessment Using Enterprise Architecture," Enterprise Information Sys- tems, vol. 5, issue 1, pp. 37-58, (jan) 2011, DOI:10.1080/17517575.2010.507878 Paper B: Per Närman, Ulrik Franke, Johan König, Markus Buschle, Mathias Ekstedt, "Enterprise Architecture Availability Analysis Using Fault Trees and Stakeholder Interviews", Enterprise Infor- mation Systems, DOI:10.1080/17517575.2011.647092 Paper C: Per Närman, Hannes Holm, Nicholas Honeth, Mathias Ekstedt, "Using Enterprise Ar- chitecture Analysis and Interview Data to Estimate Service Response Time", accepted with minor revisions to the special issue on Service Management & Engineering in the Journal of Strategic Information Systems, (aug) 2012 Paper D: Per Närman, Hannes Holm, David Höök, Nicholas Honeth, Pontus Johnson, "Using Enterprise Architecture and Technology Adoption Models to Predict Application Usage", Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 85, issue 8, pp 1953-1967, (aug) 2012, DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.02.035 Paper E: Per Närman, Markus Buschle, Mathias Ekstedt, "An Enterprise Architecture Framework for Multi-Attribute Information Systems Analysis", accepted with minor revisions to the special issue on Enterprise Modeling in the Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, (aug) 2012 Author contributions In Paper A, the general research concept is due to Närman, Johnson and Holm, the metamodel is designed by Närman, Johnson, König, the empirical data was collected by Holm and Närman, and authoring was done by Närman, Holm, Chenine, König and Ekstedt. In Paper B, the general research concept
Recommended publications
  • Filling the Gap Between Business Process Modeling and Behavior Driven Development

    Filling the Gap Between Business Process Modeling and Behavior Driven Development

    Filling the Gap between Business Process Modeling and Behavior Driven Development Rogerio Atem de Carvalho Rodrigo Soares Manhães Fernando Luis de Carvalho e Silva Nucleo de Pesquisa em Sistemas de Informação (NSI), Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF), Brazil {ratem, rmanhaes, [email protected]} 1. Introduction Behavior Driven Development (NORTH, 2006) is a specification technique that is growing in acceptance in the Agile methods communities. BDD allows to securely verify that all functional requirements were treated properly by source code, by connecting the textual description of these requirements to tests. On the other side, the Enterprise Information Systems (EIS) researchers and practitioners defends the use of Business Process Modeling (BPM) to, before defining any part of the system, perform the modeling of the system's underlying business process. Therefore, it can be stated that, in the case of EIS, functional requirements are obtained by identifying Use Cases from the business process models. The aim of this paper is, in a narrower perspective, to propose the use of Finite State Machines (FSM) to model business process and then connect them to the BDD machinery, thus driving better quality for EIS. In a broader perspective, this article aims to provoke a discussion on the mapping of the various BPM notations, since there isn't a real standard for business process modeling (Moller et al., 2007), to BDD. Firstly a historical perspective of the evolution of previous proposals from which this one emerged will be presented, and then the reasons to change from Model Driven Development (MDD) to BDD will be presented also in a historical perspective.
  • Environmental Systems Analysis Tools for Decision-Making

    Environmental Systems Analysis Tools for Decision-Making

    Environmental systems analysis tools for decision-making LCA and Swedish waste management as an example Åsa Moberg Licentiate thesis Royal Institute of Technology Department of Urban Planning and Environment Environmental Strategies Research Stockholm 2006 Titel: Environmental systems analysis tools for decision‐making LCA and Swedish waste management as an example Author: Åsa Moberg Cover page photo: Marianne Lockner TRITA‐SOM 06‐002 ISSN 1653‐6126 ISRN KTH/SOM/‐‐06/002‐‐SE ISBN 91‐7178‐304‐0 Printed in Sweden by US AB, Stockholm, 2006 2 Abstract Decisions are made based on information of different kinds. Several tools have been developed to facilitate the inclusion of environmental aspects in decision‐making on different levels. Which tool to use in a specific decision‐making situation depends on the decision context. This thesis discusses the choice between different environmental systems analysis (ESA) tools and suggests that key factors influencing the choice of ESA tool are object of study, impacts considered and information type regarding site‐specificity and according to the DPSIR‐framework. Waste management in Sweden is used as an example to illustrate decision‐making situations, but discussions concerning choice of tools are also thought to be of general concern. It is suggested that there is a need for a number of ESA tools in waste management decision‐making. Procedural tools like Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) should be used e.g. by companies applying for development of waste management facilities and by public authorities preparing plans and programmes. Within these procedural tools analytical tools providing relevant information could be used, e.g.
  • A Quantitative Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Approach for NASA's Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

    A Quantitative Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Approach for NASA's Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

    A Quantitative Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Approach for NASA's Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle Fayssai M. Safie, Ph. D. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-5278 E-mail: Fayssal.Safie @ msfc.nasa.gov Charles Daniel, Ph.D. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-5278 E-mail: Charles.Daniel @msfc.nasa.gov Prince Kalia Raytheon ITSS Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-6871 E-mail: Prince.Kalia @ msfc.nasa.gov ABSTRACT The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of a 10-year Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program to improve its space transportation capabilities for both cargo and crewed missions. The objectives of the program are to: significantly increase safety and reliability, reduce the cost of accessing low-earth orbit, attempt to leverage commercial launch capabilities, and provide a growth path for manned space exploration. The safety, reliability and life cycle cost of the next generation vehicles are major concerns, and NASA aims to achieve orders of magnitude improvement in these areas. To get these significant improvements, requires a rigorous process that addresses Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability (RMS) and safety through all the phases of the life cycle of the program. This paper discusses the RMS process being implemented for the Second Generation RLV program. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The 2nd Generation RLV program has in place quantitative Level-I RMS, and cost requirements [Ref 1] as shown in Table 1, a paradigm shift from the Space Shuttle program. This paradigm shift is generating a change in how space flight system design is approached.
  • Business Architecture: Setting the Record Straight

    Business Architecture: Setting the Record Straight

    BUSINESS ARCHITECTURE: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT By William Ulrich and Whynde Kuehn This is a Reprint of Chapter 2, Part 1, of Business and Dynamic Change: The Arrival of Business Architecture, Published by Future Strategies, Inc. © 2015, but revised January 2019 http://BusinessandDynamicChange.com COPYRIGHT © 2019 BUSINESS ARCHITECTURE ASSOCIATES 1 BUSINESS ARCHITECTURE: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT BUSINESS ARCHITECTURE: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT William Ulrich, TSG, Inc. and BAA, Inc., USA Whynde Kuehn, S2E Transformation Inc. and BAA, Inc., USA An Introduction to Business Architecture Business architecture is drawing significant interest from a wide variety of organizations worldwide. Yet business architecture is often misperceived as to its uses, origins, and value proposition. These misperceptions are the biggest barrier to adoption, because it prevents businesses in many cases from getting a business architecture effort off the ground, and undercuts sponsorship and business engagement. Business architecture is not a buzzword or a quick fix solution for a broken process, a computer system, or a single project or business unit. It is a holistic discipline that is most effective when applied across business units, practices, disciplines, and stakeholders. The discussion that follows lays out a number of fundamental business archi- tecture concepts. This includes an overview, beneficiaries, common myths, core and extended perspectives, interdisciplinary alignment, governance, get- ting started, and a vision for the future. Business Architecture: What Is It? Formally defined, business architecture represents holistic, multidimensional business views of: capabilities, end-to-end value delivery, information, and or- ganizational structure; and the relationships among these business views and strategies, products, policies, initiatives, and stakeholders.2.(1) It is an ab- stract set of standardized perspectives that represent a given business ecosys- tem.
  • Enterprise Architecture Techniques for SAP Customers

    Enterprise Architecture Techniques for SAP Customers

    October 2007 Enterprise Architecture Techniques for SAP Customers by Derek Prior Enterprise architecture has rapidly matured in recent years as a business-driven technique to provide companies with the big picture needed to optimize long-term IT investments. Some of the leading SAP customers have been quietly deploying enterprise architecture techniques to transform their business and prepare for SOA. Why haven’t you? Enterprise Strategies Report Acronyms and Initialisms ADM Architecture development method ERP Enterprise resource planning BPM Business process management ISV Independent software vendor CMDB Configuration management database ITIL IT infrastructure library CRM Customer relationship management PPM Project portfolio management DMTF Distributed Management Task Force SOA Service-oriented architecture EA Enterprise architecture TOGAF The Open Group Architecture Framework EAF Enterprise architecture framework © Copyright 2007 by AMR Research, Inc. AMR Research® is a registered trademark of AMR Research, Inc. No portion of this report may be reproduced in whole or in part without the prior written permission of AMR Research. Any written materials are protected by United States copyright laws and international treaty provisions. AMR Research offers no specific guarantee regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information presented, but the professional staff of AMR Research makes every reasonable effort to present the most reliable information available to it and to meet or exceed any applicable industry standards. AMR Research is not a registered investment advisor, and it is not the intent of this document to recommend specific companies for investment, acquisition, or other financial considerations. This is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled fiber. It is manufactured entirely with wind-generated electricity and in accordance with a Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) pilot program that certifies products made with high percentages of post-consumer reclaimed materials.
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language

    Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language

    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
  • CISM160 Systems Analysis and Design Course Syllabus

    CISM160 Systems Analysis and Design Course Syllabus

    ATLANTIC CAPE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ISAS DEPARTMENT COURSE SYLLABUS COURSE TITLE: CISM160 Systems Analysis and Design Instructor: Dr. Otto Hernandez Office: A-142 Phone: 609-343-4978 eMail: [email protected] REQUIRED TEXTBOOK AND MATERIALS: Essentials of Systems Analysis and Design. Author: Valacich; Edition: 6th; ISBN: 9780133546231 COURSE DESCRIPTION: Investigation of information systems with respect to their existence and identification and development of needed informational improvements within an organization. Recommended methods and procedures considering computer involvement are reviewed, designed and implemented using the case-study approach PRE-REQUISITE: one of the following: CISM135, CISM154 or CISM174 ADA STATEMENT: As per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), reasonable accommodations can be provided to students who present current documentation (within five years) of a disability to Atlantic Cape Community College’s Center for Accessibility, located on the first floor of “J” Building in the Counseling and Support Services department (Mays Landing campus). Reasonable accommodations cannot be provided for a course until the student registers with the Center for Accessibility. For more information, please contact the Center for Accessibility via email at [email protected] call 609-343- 5680. LEARNING GOALS & OBJECTIVES: A) Understanding the Systems Development Environment 1. Define information systems analysis and design. 2. Define and discuss the modern approach to systems analysis and design. 3. Illustrate how systems development extends to different types of information systems and not just transaction processing systems. 4. Introduce the traditional information systems development life cycle, which serves as the basis for the organization of the material in this book. 5. Show that the life cycle is a flexible basis for systems analysis and design and that it can support many different tools and techniques, such as prototyping and JAD.
  • Linking Business Models with Business Architecture to Drive Innovation

    Linking Business Models with Business Architecture to Drive Innovation

    Linking Business Models with Business Architecture to Drive Innovation Linking Business Models with Business Architecture to Drive Innovation A Business Architecture Guild Whitepaper Principal Co-Authors: Steve DuPont, Karen Erwin, Bryan Lail, Stephen Marshall Reviewers: Remco Blom, Frank Fons, William Ulrich, Wilton Wratten, Carl Zuhl August 2015 1 Copyright ©2015 Business Architecture Guild Linking Business Models with Business Architecture to Drive Innovation Executive Summary A business model describes the rationale of how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value.1 Organizations are expanding their innovation focus from products and processes to business models in order to remain competitive in the face of shrinking product lifecycles and growing market uncertainties. They are increasingly embracing the business model concept in strategic planning, accompanied by a greater focus on customers and corresponding value propositions. In a parallel development, organizations are using business architecture to provide increased business transparency and maximize the likelihood of an effective and successful deployment of strategy. Business architecture is defined as “a blueprint of the enterprise that provides a common understanding of the organization and is used to align strategic objectives and tactical demands.”2 Despite the natural progression from business models (as an expression of business strategy) to business architecture (as the actionable blueprint for that strategy), these two concepts have evolved separately. To date, limited consideration has been given as to how they relate to each other. This white paper aims to address that gap, by demonstrating that the two approaches not only relate to each other but also work well together to effect change. We further expand on this synergy with a practical case study.
  • Matters of (Meta-) Modeling

    Matters of (Meta-) Modeling

    Appeared in the Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, Volume 5, Number 4, pp. 369-385, December 2006 Matters of (Meta-) Modeling Thomas Kuh¨ ne Darmstadt University of Technology, Darmstadt, Germany e-mail: [email protected] Abstract With the recent trend to model driven engineering ontologies for the basic terms of their discipline, any com- a common understanding of basic notions such as “model” munication may create the illusion of agreement where there and “metamodel” becomes a pivotal issue. Even though these is none, i.e., unnoticed misunderstandings, and raise barriers notions have been in widespread use for quite a while, there of communication where they are just accidental. is still little consensus about when exactly it is appropriate In the following we will focus on the term “model” in the to use them. The aim of this article is to start establishing a context of model driven engineering. Our models are thus all consensus about generally acceptable terminology. Its main language-based in nature, unlike, e.g., physical scale models contributions are the distinction between two fundamental- and they describe something as opposed to models in mathe- ly different kinds of model roles, i.e. “token model” versus matics which are understood as interpretations of a theory [3]. “type model”1, a formal notion of “metaness”, and the consi- In an attempt to define the scope of the notion “model” we deration of “generalization” as yet another basic relationship should consider how it has been traditionally used in softwa- between models. In particular, the recognition of the funda- re engineering.
  • Introduction to Systems Modeling Languages

    Introduction to Systems Modeling Languages

    Fundamentals of Systems Engineering Prof. Olivier L. de Weck, Mark Chodas, Narek Shougarian Session 3 System Modeling Languages 1 Reminder: A1 is due today ! 2 3 Overview Why Systems Modeling Languages? Ontology, Semantics and Syntax OPM – Object Process Methodology SySML – Systems Modeling Language Modelica What does it mean for Systems Engineering of today and tomorrow (MBSE)? 4 Exercise: Describe the “Mr. Sticky” System Work with a partner (5 min) Use your webex notepad/white board I will call on you randomly We will compare across student teams © source unknown. All rights reserved. This content is excluded from our Creative Commons license. For more information, see http://ocw.mit.edu/help/faq-fair-use/. 5 Why Systems Modeling Languages? Means for describing artifacts are traditionally as follows: Natural Language (English, French etc….) Graphical (Sketches and Drawings) These then typically get aggregated in “documents” Examples: Requirements Document, Drawing Package Technical Data Package (TDP) should contain all info needed to build and operate system Advantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Familiarity to creator of description Not-confining, promotes creativity Disadvantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Room for ambiguous interpretations and errors Difficult to update if there are changes Handoffs between SE lifecycle phases are discontinuous Uneven level of abstraction Large volume of information that exceeds human cognitive bandwidth Etc…. 6 System Modeling Languages Past efforts
  • Systems Analysis – a New Paradigm and Decision Support Tools for the Water Framework Directive

    Systems Analysis – a New Paradigm and Decision Support Tools for the Water Framework Directive

    Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 739–749, 2008 www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/12/739/2008/ Hydrology and © Author(s) 2008. This work is distributed under Earth System the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Sciences Systems Analysis – a new paradigm and decision support tools for the water framework directive M. Bruen Centre for Water Resources Research, University College Dublin, Newstead, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland Received: 23 May 2007 – Published in Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.: 12 June 2007 Revised: 3 March 2008 – Accepted: 7 April 2008 – Published: 15 May 2008 Abstract. In the early days of Systems Analysis the focus education and outreach influencing behaviour), economic in- was on providing tools for optimisation, modelling and sim- struments and legislation. Regardless of any scientific and ulation for use by experts. Now there is a recognition of the economic justification, it is unlikely that all proposed mea- need to develop and disseminate tools to assist in making de- sures or policies will be acceptable to all stakeholders so cisions, negotiating compromises and communicating pref- that considerable controversy and some planning and legal erences that can easily be used by stakeholders without the challenges can be expected. Consultation, negotiation, com- need for specialist training. The Water Framework Direc- promise and refinement of measures can be expected. Thus tive (WFD) requires public participation and thus provides it is imperative that all decisions on policy and measures a strong incentive for progress in this direction. This pa- be taken not only (i) on the basis of the best available sci- per places the new paradigm in the context of the classical entific and economic information but also (ii) be taken us- one and discusses some of the new approaches which can be ing an unbiased, independent and logical methodology and used in the implementation of the WFD.
  • Industrial Product-Service Systems Engineering

    Industrial Product-Service Systems Engineering

    Download Workshop Material https://tinyurl.com/Jacaranda18 www.omilab.org Advanced Enterprise Architecture Modeling Support through Metamodeling Platforms Dr. Dominik Bork, University of Vienna [email protected] @BorkDominik University of Pretoria, Pretoria, September 25th 2018 www.omilab.org Outline • Welcome & Introduction • Metamodeling with ADOxx • Enterprise Architecture Management • ArchiMate 3.0.1 and TOGAF • EAM Case Study • Discussion & Evaluation www.omilab.org 3 WELCOME & INTRODUCTION www.omilab.org 4 Who we are • Dr. Dominik Bork Post-doctoral Researcher University of Vienna, RG Knowledge Engineering [email protected] Project Team: • University of Vienna – Prof. Dr. Dimitris Karagiannis – Dr. Dominik Bork – Elena-Teodora Miron, MSc – Anna Sumereder, BA • University of Pretoria – Prof. Dr. Alta van der Merwe – Prof. Dr. Aurona Gerber – Dr. Sunet Eybers – Dr. Phil van Deventer www.omilab.org 5 The Research Project • Austria - South Africa Scientific & Technological Cooperation Program • Goal: – Extend the reach of ArchiMate for EA management – Involve experts and practitioners of EAM for requirements engineering and evaluation of the modelling tool – Develop an open modeling tool for advanced EAM – Knowledge transfer through workshops, papers, and tutorials – Provide teaching and training material • Austrian project lead: – University of Vienna, Prof. Dr. Dimitris Karagiannis • South Africa project lead: – University of Pretoria, Porf. Dr. Alta van der Merwe • Duration: Jan. 2017 – Dec. 2018 www.omilab.org University