Advertisement

A software process model for business reengineering

  • A. T. Berztiss
  • J. A. BubenkoJr.
Chapter
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT)

Abstract

A major component of any business reengineering effort is the identification of business processes, and the development of software to support these processes. The development of the software is itself a process, commonly called the software process. One reason for reengineering a business is to decentralize its mode of operation, or to make a decentralized mode more effective. We contend that a properly defined general software process model is essential for the development of support software for a reengineered decentralized enterprise. We have developed a sixteen-step plan for business reengineering, and an enterprise model composed of eight submodels. In this paper we bring together the enterprise model, relevant steps of the business reengineering plan, and the Capability Maturity Model of the Software Engineering Institute to define a software process model for business reengineering.

Keywords

Business process business reengineering capability maturity model enterprise model process model software process 

References

  1. Berztiss, A.T. (1993) Information transfer for decision support in distributed administrative systems, in Decision Support in Public Administration (eds. P.W.G. Bots, H.G. Sol, R.Traunmuller ), North-Holland, 3–15.Google Scholar
  2. Berztiss, A. (1993a) Concurrent engineering of information systems, in Proc. IFIP WG8.1 Working Conf. on Information System Development Processes (eds. N. Prakash, C. Rolland, B. Pernici ), North-Holland, 311–324.Google Scholar
  3. Berztiss, A.T. (1995) Software methods for business reengineering. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Bubenko, J.A. (1993) Extending the scope of information modelling, in Proc. Fourth International Workshop on the Deductive Approach to Information Systems and Databases (ed. A. Olive ), Departament de Llenguatges i Sistemes Informatics of the Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, 73–97.Google Scholar
  5. Bubenko, J.A., Rolland, C., Loucopoulos, P., and DeAntonellis, V. (1994) Facilitating “fuzzy to formal” requirements modelling, in Proc. IEEE Internat. Conf. on Requirements Eng..Google Scholar
  6. Constantine, L.L., and Yourdon, E. (1979) Structured design. Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Curtis, B., Krasner, H., and Iscoe, N. (1988) A field study of the software design process for large systems. Communications of the ACM, 31, 1268–1287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davenport, T.H. (1993) Process innovation: reengineering work through information technology. Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hammer, M., and Champy, J. (1993) Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto for business revolution. Harper Business.Google Scholar
  10. Humphrey, W.S. (1989) Managing the software process. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  11. Jarke, M., Mylopoulos, J., Schmidt, J.W., and Vassiliou, Y. (1992) DAIDA: an environment for evolving information systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 10, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jarke, M., Bubenko, J.A., Rolland, C., Sutcliffe, A., and Vassiliou, Y. (1993) Theories underlying requirements engineering: an overview of NATURE at genesis, in Proc. IEEE Symposium on Requirements Engineering, RE’93.Google Scholar
  13. Johansson, H.J., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A.J., and Wheeler, W.A. (1993) Business Process Reengineering: Breakpoint Strategies for Reengineering. Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Paulk, M.C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M.B., and Weber, C.V. (1993), Capability Maturity Model, Version 1.1. IEEE Software, 10 (4), 18–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Paulk, M.C., Weber, C., Garcia, S., Chrissis, M.B., and Bush, M. (1993a), Key practices of the Capability Maturity Model Version 1.1. SEI Report CMU/SEI-93-TR-25, Software Engineering Institute of Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
  16. Smith, C.U. (1990) Performance Engineering of Software Systems. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  17. Spector, A., and Gifford, D. (1986) A computer science perspective on bridge design. Communications of the ACM, 29, 268–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Yu, E. and Mylopoulos, J. (1994) From E-R to “A-R”–modelling strategic actor relationships for business process reengineering, in Proc. 13th Internat. Conference Entity-Relationship Approach (LNCS No. 881, ed. P. Loucopoulos ), Springer-Verlag, 548–565.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. T. Berztiss
    • 1
    • 2
  • J. A. BubenkoJr.
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.SYSLABUniversity of StockholmSweden
  3. 3.SISUStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations