Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Expert Discipline to Common Practice: A Vision and Research Agenda for Extending the Reach of Enterprise Modeling

  • Research Notes
  • Published:
Business & Information Systems Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The benefits of enterprise modeling (EM) and its contribution to organizational tasks are largely undisputed in business and information systems engineering. EM as a discipline has been around for several decades but is typically performed by a limited number of people in organizations with an affinity to modeling. What is captured in models is only a fragment of what ought to be captured. Thus, this research note argues that EM is far from its maximum potential. Many people develop some kind of model in their local practice without thinking about it consciously. Exploiting the potential of this “grass roots modeling” could lead to groundbreaking innovations. The aim is to investigate integration of the established practices of modeling with local practices of creating and using model-like artifacts of relevance for the overall organization. The paper develops a vision for extending the reach of EM, identifies research areas contributing to the vision and proposes elements of a future research agenda.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allemang D, Hendler J (2011) Semantic web for the working ontologist: effective modeling in RDFS and OWL. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Anaya V, Berio G, Harzallah M, Heymans P, Matulevičius R, Opdahl AL, Panetto H, Verdecho M J (2010) The unified enterprise modelling language—overview and further work. Comput Ind 61(2)

  • Benkenstein M, Fellmann M, Leyer M, Sandkuhl K (2016) The value of enterprise modelling: towards a service-centric perspective. In: Horkoff J, Jeusfeld MA, Persson A (eds) The practice of enterprise modeling. In: 9th IFIP WG 8.1. Working Conference, PoEM 2016, pp 299–306

  • Berners-Lee T, Hendler J et al (2001) The semantic web—a new form of web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Sci Am 284(5):34–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berzisa S, Bravos G, González TC, Czubayko U, España S, Grabis J et al (2015) Capability driven development: an approach to designing digital enterprises. Bus Inf Syst Eng 57(1):15–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bizer C, Heath T, Berners-Lee T (2009) Linked data-the story so far. Semantic services, interoperability and web applications: emerging concepts. Int J Semant Web Inf Syst 5(3):205–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) Crowdsourcing: how to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Q Exec 4(12):199–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Bork D, Fill HG (2014) Formal aspects of enterprise modeling methods: a comparison framework. In: Proceedings of the 2014 47th International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE

  • Bork D, Fill HG, Karagiannis D, Miron ET, Tantouris N, Walch M (2015) Conceptual modelling for smart cities: a teaching case. Inter Design Arch J 27:10–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner W, Karagiannis D, Kolbe L, Krüger J, Leifer L, Lamberti H, Leimeister J, Österle H, Petrie C, Plattner H, Schwabe G, Uebernickel F, Winter R, Zarnekow R (2015) User, use & utility research—the digital user as new design perspective in business and information systems engineering. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1):55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corradi G, Gherardi S, Verzelloni L (2010) Through the practice lens: where is the bandwagon of practice-based studies heading? Manag Learn 41(3):265–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalkir K (2013) Knowledge management in theory and practice. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Delfmann P, Herwig S, Lis L, Stein A, Tent K, Becker J (2010) Pattern specification and matching in conceptual models—a generic approach based on set operations. Enterp Model Inf Syst Archit 5(3):24–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz JLG (2006) Enterprise ontology—theory and methodology. Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz JLG (2008) Architecture. Building strategy into design. Academic Service, The Hague

  • Fellmann M, Zarvic N, Metzger D, Koschmider A (2015) Requirements catalog for business process modeling recommender systems WI 2015, Osnabrück, Germany, March 4–6. In: Thomas O, Teuteberg F (eds) Smart enterprise engineering: 12. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015, pp 393–407

  • Fill HG (2011) On the conceptualization of a modeling language for semantic model annotations. In: CAiSE 2011 Workshops, Springer. LNBIP vol. 83, pp 134–148

  • Fill HG (2016) SeMFIS: a flexible engineering platform for semantic annotations of conceptual models. Semant Web 8(5):747–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fill HG, Johannsen F (2016) A knowledge perspective on big data by joining enterprise modeling and data analyses. In: Bui TX, Sprague RH (eds) 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE

  • Fill HG, Karagiannis D (2013) On the conceptualisation of modelling methods using the adoxx meta modelling platform. Enterp Model Inf Syst Archit 8(1):4–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fill HG, Redmond T, Karagiannis D (2012) FDMM: A formalism for describing ADOxx meta models and models. In: Leszek M, Cuzzocrea A, Cordeiro J (eds) Proceedings of ICEIS 2012, vol. 3. SciTePress, Lisbon, pp 133–144

  • Fischbach M, Puschmann T, Alt R (2013) Service lifecycle management. Bus Inf Syst Eng 5(1):45–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank U (2014a) Multilevel modeling—toward a new paradigm of conceptual modeling and information systems design. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(6):319–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank U (2014b) Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. Softw Syst Model 13(3):941–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank U, Strecker S, Fettke P, vom Brocke J, Becker J, Sinz E (2014) The research field “modeling business information systems”—current challenges and elements of a future research agenda. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1)

  • Fraser MD, Kumar K et al (1994) Strategies for incorporating formal specifications in software development. Commun ACM 37(10):74–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner D, Fehskens L, Naidu M, Rouse WB, Ross JW (2012) Point-counterpoint: enterprise architecture and enterprise transformation as related but distinct concepts. J Enter Transform 2(4):283–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber T (2008) Collective knowledge systems: where the social web meets the semantic web. J Web Sem 6(1):4–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutschmidt A, Sandkuhl K, Borchardt U (2017) Multi-touch table or plastic wall? Design of a study for the comparison of media in modeling workshops, 2016. In: Abramowicz W, Alt R, Franczyk B (eds) Business information systems workshops 2016, LNBIP 263. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 123–135

  • Henderson-Sellers B, Ralyté J, Ågerfalk PJ, Rossi M (2014) Situational method engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 1–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermans FFJ (2012) Analyzing and visualizing spreadsheets. PhD thesis, Software Engineering Research Group, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

  • Hoppenbrouwers SJBA, Rouwette EAJA (2012) A dialogue game for analysing group model building: framing collaborative modelling and its facilitation. Int J Org Design Eng 2(1):19–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppenbrouwers SJBA, van Stokkum W (2013) From dialogue games to mthinklets: overview and synthesis of a collaborative modeling approach. Int J E-Collab 9(4):32–44

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC 24744 (2014) Software engineering—metamodel for development methodologies. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=62644. Accessed 23 Nov 2017

  • Iyer B, Basole R (2016) Visualization to understand ecosystems. Commun ACM 59(11):27–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb J, Rudner B, Reichert M (2013) Gesture-based process modeling using multi-touch devices. IJISMD 4(4):48–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Krogstie J (2016) Quality in business process modeling. Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krogstie J, Dalberg V, Jensen SM (2006) Process modeling value framework. In: Manolopoulos Y, Filipe J, Constantopoulos P, Cordeiro J (eds) Selected papers from ICEIS 2006, LNBIP 3. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 309–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Krogstie BR, Schmidt AP, Kunzmann C, Krogstie J, Mora S (2013) Linking reflective learning and knowledge maturing in organizations. In: ARTEL@ EC-TEL, pp 13–28

  • Kusel A, Schönböck J, Wimmer M, Kappel G, Retschitzegger W, Schwinger W (2015) Reuse in model-to-model transformation languages: are we there yet? Softw Syst Model 14(2):537–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimeister JM (2010) Collective intelligence. Bus Inf Syst Eng 4(2):245–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lillehagen F, Krogstie J (2009) Active knowledge modelling of enterprises. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff P, Heath C (1998) Mobility in collaboration. In: ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ACM

  • Luff P, Hindmarsh J, Heath C (2000) Workplace studies: recovering work practice and informing system design. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maier S, Minas M (2015) Recording, processing, and visualizing changes in diagrams. In: IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing

  • Martens A, Fettke P, Loos P (2015) Inductive development of reference process models based on factor analysis WI 2015, Osnabrück, March 4–6. In: Thomas O, Teuteberg F (eds) Smart Enterprise Engineering: 12. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015, pp 438–452

  • Matthes F, Neubert C, Schneider AW (2013) Fostering collaborative and integrated enterprise architecture modeling. J Enterp Model Inf Syst Architectures 8(1)

  • Narayanan NH, Hübscher R (1998) Visual language theory: towards a human-computer interaction perspective. In: Marriott K (ed) Visual language theory. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann G, Sobernig S, Aram M (2014) Evolutionary business information systems—perspectives and challenges of an emerging class of information systems. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(1):33–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obrst L (2003) Ontologies for semantically interoperable systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, New Orleans, ACM Press

  • Opdahl AL, Berio G, Harzallah M, Matulevičius R (2012) An ontology for enterprise and information systems modelling. Appl Ontol 7(1):49–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppl S (2016) Towards scaffolding collaborative articulation and alignment of mental models. In: Proceedings of ICKM 2016. Elsevier Procedia Computer Science

  • Orlikowski W (1993) Learning from notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation. Inf Soc 9(3):237–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Probst G, Raub S, Romhardt K (2000) Managing knowledge—building blocks for success. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Reschenhofer T, Bhat M, Hernandez-Mendez A, Matthes F (2016) Lessons learned in aligning data and model evolution in collaborative information systems. In: Proc. International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)

  • Ross JW, Quaadgras A (2012) Enterprise architecture is not just for architects. Center for Information Systems Research Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  • Roth S, Hauder M, Matthes F (2013) Collaborative evolution of enterprise architecture models. 8th International Workshop on Models at Runtime (Models@run.time 2013)

  • Sandkuhl K, Stirna J, Persson A, Wißotzki M (2014) Enterprise modeling: tackling business challenges with the 4EM method (The Enterprise Engineering Series). Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki TR (2001) Practice minded orders. In: Schatzki TR, Knorr Cetina K, Savigny E (eds) The practice turn in contemporary theory. Routledge, London

  • Star S, Griesemer J (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907–39. Soc Stud Sci 19(3):387–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirna J, Persson A, Sandkuhl K (2007) Participative enterprise modeling: experiences and recommendations. International conference on advanced information systems engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 546–560

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Studer R, Benjamins VR, Fensel D (1998) Knowledge engineering: principles and methods. Data Knowl Eng 25(1):161–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theunissen T, van Heesch U (2016) The disappearance of technical specifications in web and mobile applications. In: Proceedings of ECSA

  • Thomas O, Fellmann M (2007) Semantic business process management: ontology-based process modeling using event-driven process chains. IBIS 2(1):29–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Deursen A, Klint P, Visser J (2000) Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography. Sigplan Not 35(6):26–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernadat FB (1996) Enterprise modelling and Integration. Chapman & Hall

  • von Hippel (2005) Democratizing innovation: the evolving phenomenon of user innovation. J Betriebswirtschaft 55(1):63–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss S, Aier S, Winter R (2013) Institutionalization and the effectiveness of enterprise architecture management. In: International Conference on Information Systems, AIS

  • Winter R (2004) Architektur braucht Management. Wirtschaftsinformatik 46(4):317–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter R (2014) Architectural thinking. Bus Inf. Syst Eng 6(6):361–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon Y, Myers B (2015) Semantic zooming of code change history. In: IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing

  • Zdravkovic J, Stirna J, Kirikova M, Karagiannis, D, Winter R (2015) Advanced enterprise modeling. Bus Inf Syst Eng 57(1)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is a result of the Dagstuhl seminar no. 16192 on, Supporting Organizational Efficiency and Agility: Models, Languages and Software Systems (see http://www.dagstuhl.de/de/programm/kalender/semhp/?semnr=16192).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computer Science, Faculty of Computer and Electrical Engineering, University of Rostock, Albert-Einstein-Str. 22, 18057, Rostock, Germany

    Kurt Sandkuhl

  2. Information Systems, System Development and Database Application Group, Faculty of Information Systems and Applied Computer Sciences, University of Bamberg, An der Weberei 5, 96047, Bamberg, Germany

    Hans-Georg Fill

  3. Faculty of Engineering, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Ruitenberglaan 26, 6826 CC, Arnhem, The Netherlands

    Stijn Hoppenbrouwers

  4. Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Sem Sælands vei 9, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    John Krogstie

  5. Chair of Software Engineering for Business Information Systems, Department of Informatics, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstrasse 3, 85748, Garching Bei München, Germany

    Florian Matthes & Ömer Uludag

  6. Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen, Fosswinckelsgate 6, 5009, Bergen, Norway

    Andreas Opdahl

  7. Department of Informatics, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland

    Gerhard Schwabe

  8. Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen, Müller-Friedberg-Strasse 8, 9000, St.Gallen, Switzerland

    Robert Winter

Authors
  1. Kurt Sandkuhl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans-Georg Fill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stijn Hoppenbrouwers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Krogstie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Florian Matthes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andreas Opdahl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gerhard Schwabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ömer Uludag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Robert Winter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kurt Sandkuhl.

Additional information

Accepted after two revisions by Prof. Dr. Bichler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sandkuhl, K., Fill, HG., Hoppenbrouwers, S. et al. From Expert Discipline to Common Practice: A Vision and Research Agenda for Extending the Reach of Enterprise Modeling. Bus Inf Syst Eng 60, 69–80 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0516-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0516-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation