Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Explanatory Capabilities of Enterprise Modeling Approaches

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Enterprise Engineering IX (EEWC 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 211))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The capability of an enterprise modeling approach to support the provision of knowledge on selected aspects of an enterprise may be apprehended as its explanatory capability. We argue that this capability encompasses two aspects: the capability to represent “the things happening in an enterprise” and the ‘self-explanatory’ capability that relates to the understandability of the approach and the resulting models. In this paper, we propose an analysis framework that can be used to assess the explanatory capabilities of enterprise modeling approaches. The framework is structured according to the four explanatory causes of Aristotle. We demonstrate the applicability of the framework by analyzing three selected enterprise modeling approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. SoSym 13(3), 941–962 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bock, A., Kaczmarek, M., Overbeek, S., Heß, M.: A comparative analysis of selected enterprise modeling approaches. In: Frank, U., Loucopoulos, P., Pastor, Ó., Petrounias, I. (eds.) PoEM 2014. LNBIP, vol. 197, pp. 148–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Kirikova, M.: Explanatory capability of enterprise models. Data Knowl. Eng. 33(2), 119–136 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE TSE 35(6), 756–779 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Krogstie, J.: Modelling of the people, by the people, for the people. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A., Brinkkemper, S. (eds.) Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering, pp. 305–318. Springer, Berlin (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Lankhorst, M.: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis. The Enterprise Engineering Series, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Frank, U.: Power-modelling: toward a more versatile approach to creating and using conceptual models. In: Proceedings of 4th International Symposium on BMSD, pp. 9–19 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Siau, K., Rossi, M.: Evaluation techniques for systems analysis and design modelling methods - a review and comparative analysis. ISJ 21(3), 249–268 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Strahringer, S.: Metamodellierung als Instrument des Methodenergleichs. Evaluierung am Beispiel objektorientierter Analysemethoden. Shaker, Aachen (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Stachowiak, H.: Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Springer, Wien (1973)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson, P., Ekstedt, M.: Enterprise Architecture: Models and Analyses for Information Systems Decision Making. Lightning Source Incorporated (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cilliers, P.: Making sense of a complex world. In: Aaltonen, M. (ed.) The Third Lens: Multi-Ontology Sense-Making & Strategic Decision-Making, pp. 99–110. Ashgate, Hampshire (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. McIntyre, L.: Complexity: a philosopher’s reflections. Complex. 3(6), 26–32 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modelling: background and terminological foundation. ICB-Research Report 46, Universität Duisburg-Essen (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rumbaugh, J.: Objects in the constitution - enterprise modeling. J. Object-Oriented Program. 5(8), 18–24 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leist-Galanos, S.: Methoden zur Unternehmensmodellierung. Vergleich, Anwendungen und Integrationspotentiale. Logos, Berlin (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Buckl, S., Schweda, C.M.: On the state-of-the-art in enterprise architecture management literature. Technical report, sebis, Technical University Munich (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bork, D., Fill, H.G.: Formal aspects of enterprise modeling methods: a comparison framework. In: Proceedings of HICSS-47, pp. 3400–3409 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bjeković, M., Proper, H.A., Sottet, J.-S.: Embracing pragmatics. In: Yu, E., Dobbie, G., Jarke, M., Purao, S. (eds.) ER 2014. LNCS, vol. 8824, pp. 431–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Juarrero, A.: Causality and explanation. In: Allen, P., Maguire, S., McKelvey, B. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Complexity and Management, pp. 155–164. SAGE Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. McKelvey, B.: Toward a complexity science of entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 19(3), 313–341 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kaminska-Labbe, R., McKelvey, B., Thomas, C.: On the coevolution of causality: a study of aristotelian causes & other entangled influences. Working paper, CERAM, Sophia Antipolis, France (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kosiol, E.: Organisation der Unternehmung. Gabler, Wiesbaden (1962)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. March, J.G., Simon, H.A.: Organizations. Wiley, New York (1958)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cyert, R.M., March, J.G.: A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Taylor, J.R.: Rethinking the Theory of Organizational Communication: How to Read an Organization. Ablex, Norwood (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Figl, K., Laue, R.: Cognitive complexity in business process modeling. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) CAiSE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6741, pp. 452–466. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Sarshar, K., Loos, P.: Comparing the control-flow of EPC and Petri Net from the end-user perspective. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 434–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Dahlbom, B., Mandahl, M.: A theory of information technology use. In Kerola, I.P. (ed.) Precedings of the 17th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, pp. 66–67. University of Oulu (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Barnes, J.: The Complete Works of Aristotle. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gutenberg, E.: Die Unternehmung als Gegenstand betriebswirtschaftlicher Theorie: Unveränderter Nachdruck der Auflage Berlin 1929. Gabler, Wiesbaden (1998)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  32. Grochla, E.: Einführung in die Organisationstheorie. Poeschel, Stuttgart (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Cooren, F., Kuhn, T., Cornelissen, J.P., Clark, T.: Communication, organizing and organization. Organ. Stud. 32(9), 1149–1170 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nielsen, J.: Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In: Proceedings of Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 152–158. ACM, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Cardoso, J.: What makes process models understandable? In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Aranda, J., Ernst, N., Horkoff, J., Easterbrook, S.: A framework for empirical evaluation of model comprehensibility. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering, p. 7. IEEE Computer Society (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  37. The Open Group: ArchiMate 2.0 specification: Open Group Standard. The Open Group Series. Van Haren, Zaltbommel (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology: Theory & Methodology. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Dietz, J.L.G.: Demo-3: Models and representations (version 3.7) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Frank, U.: MEMO Organisation Modelling Language (2): Focus on Business Processes. ICB Research Report 49, University of Duisburg-Essen (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Frank, U.: MEMO Organisation Modelling Language (1): Focus on Organisational Structure. ICB-Research Report 48, University of Duisburg-Essen (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Köhling, C.: Entwurf einer konzeptuellen Modellierungsmethode zur Unterstützung rationaler Zielplanungsprozesse in Unternehmen. Ph.D. thesis, University of Duisburg-Essen (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Strecker, S., Frank, U., Heise, D., Kattenstroth, H.: MetricM: a modeling method in support of the reflective design and use of performance measurement systems. ISeB 10(2), 241–276 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Jung, J.: Entwurf einer Sprache für die Modellierung von Ressourcen im Kontext der Geschäftsprozessmodellierung. Logos, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Heise, D.: Unternehmensmodell-basiertes IT-Kostenmanagement als Bestandteil eines integrativen IT-Controllings. Logos, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Dietz, J.L.G.: Demo: towards a discipline of organisation engineering. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 128(2), 351–363 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. The Open Group: TOGAF Version 9.1. Van Haren, Zaltbommel (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Décosse, C., Molnar, W.A., Proper, H.A.: What does DEMO Do? A qualitative analysis about DEMO in practice: founders, modellers and beneficiaries. In: Aveiro, D., Tribolet, J., Gouveia, D. (eds.) EEWC 2014. LNBIP, vol. 174, pp. 16–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Information Systems and Enterprise Modeling, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Institute for Computer Science and Business Information Systems (ICB), University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstraße 9, 45141, Essen, Germany

    Monika Kaczmarek, Alexander Bock & Michael Heß

Authors
  1. Monika Kaczmarek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Bock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Heß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monika Kaczmarek .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Madeira, Funchal, Portugal

    David Aveiro

  2. Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

    Robert Pergl

  3. Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

    Michal Valenta

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kaczmarek, M., Bock, A., Heß, M. (2015). On the Explanatory Capabilities of Enterprise Modeling Approaches. In: Aveiro, D., Pergl, R., Valenta, M. (eds) Advances in Enterprise Engineering IX. EEWC 2015. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 211. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19297-0_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19297-0_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19296-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19297-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation