3. Research Scope
Goal modeling: linking stakeholders with artifacts
The holy grail?: An artifact should serve the purpose
envisioned by stakeholders!
System Development: GORE [1], BMM [2]
IT alignment, IT Strategy
Enterprise’s strategic alignment , Business Strategy?
4. Research Scope
Current efforts
Combinations of languages
to align strategy and value
proposition to related
operational processes
Examples: INSTAL, business
modeling with UML, CREWS-
L’Ecritoire, e3-value, 3g
framework, i* & RAD, goal
modeling and value modeling
ontology, i* and strategy
maps [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]
Shortcomings
Operationally focused
Lack goal traceability
No clear link between value
creation and system goals
No support on different
stakeholder view integration
and evaluation
Lack of requirement to
strategy traceability
Method specific
6. Background
Goal modeling languages
In RE [11]:
various levels of applicability
(e.g. the RE process)
semi-formal vs formal
In business
business model & business
plan expressiveness (BMM)
goal oriented enterprise
(Popova & Sharpanskykh)
[12]
Business Strategy [13]
The resource-based view
The industrial organization
perspective
The Schumpeterian view of
competition
7. Background
Inspired by the Unified Enterprise Modeling
Language, UEML[14]:
We aim at a core language for modeling business
strategy aligning business strategy to system
requirements
We intend to analyze and evaluate goal-oriented
languages against a well defined ontological base
Our ontological base: a unified business strategy
meta-model (business strategy concepts and
frameworks)
9. Strategy Maps
Strategy Maps (what?)
Four organizational perspectives of the Balance Scorecard
framework (BSC): financial, customer, internal, learning and
growth
Both external & internal (all business activities)
Structure: Cause-effect links/assumptions
Build top-down (causality is bottom-up)
Communicate direction and priorities
Strategy Maps (why?) [15]
A mediator between Mission, core values, Vision and Strategy to
the concrete operational actions
Provides a visual representation
11. The Strategy Map Meta-model
Modeling Strategy Maps
the Strategy Map template provides the main
concepts
Applications from literature provide conceptual
variations emboddied through constrains
Cardinality restrictions between classes both from the
template and literature
13. The Strategy Map Meta-model
Includes all elements of Strategy Maps
Supports utilization scenarios:
As-is
To-be
Generalizes some elements for applicability (Groups)
Introduces explicitely user defined groups and
perspetives
Separates classes and instances (application)
14. Future Work
Extend the meta-model using BSC
Provide a richer semantic basis and enrich it with
concepts from other approaches representing
busines strategies
Start evaluating how goal modeling languages (i*,
KAOS, BMM, etc.) can express business strategy
using this meta-model
15. References
[1] van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: 5th IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 249–
262. IEEE Press, New York (2001)
[2] Business Rules Group (BRG): The Business Motivation Model. Group (2007)
[3] Bleistein, S.J., Cox, K., Verner, J.: Validating strategic alignment of organizational IT requirements using goal modeling and problem diagrams. J. Systems
and Software 79, 362–378 (2006)
[4] Thevenet, L.H., Salinesi, C.: Aligning IS to organization’s strategy: the INSTAL method. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and
WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 203–217. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
[5] Nurcan, S., Etien, A., Kaabi, R., Zoukar, I., Rolland, C.: A strategy driven business process modelling approach. J. Business Process Management 11, 628–
649 (2005)
[6] Gordijn, J., Petit, M., Wieringa, R.: Understanding business strategies of networked value constellations using goal- and value modeling. In: 14th IEEE
International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2006), pp. 129–138 (2006)
[7] van der Raadt, B., Gordijn, J., Yu, E.: Exploring web services ideas from a business value perspective. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on
Requirements Engineering (RE 2005), pp. 53–62. IEEE CS, Los Alamitos (2005)
[8] Edirisuriya, A.: Design Support for e-Commerce Information Systems using Goal, Business and Process Modelling. PhD Thesis. Department of Computer
and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (2009)
[9] Singh, S.N., Woo, C.: Investigating business-IT alignment through multi-disciplinary goal concepts. J. Requirements Engineering 14, 177–207 (2009)
[10] Babar, A., Zowghi, D., Chew, E.: Using Goals to Model Strategy Map for Business IT Alignment. In: 5th International Workshop on Business/IT Alignment
and Interoperability (BUSITAL 2010), pp. 16–30 (2010)
[11] Kavakli, E., Loucopoulos, P.: Goal Driven Requirements Engineering: Evaluation of Current Methods. In: 8th CAiSE/IFIP8.1 Workshop on Evaluation of
Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design, EMMSAD (2003)
[12] Popova, V., Sharpanskykh, A.: Formal Modelling of Goals in Organizations. Technical report, VU University faculty of Science (2008)
[13] Barney, J.: Types of Competition and the Theory of Strategy: Toward an Integrative Framework. J. Academy of Management Review 11, 791–800 (1986)
[14] Anaya, V., Berio, G., Harzallah, M., Heymans, P., Matulevicius, R., Opdahl, A., Panetto, H., Verdecho, M.J.: The Unified Enterprise Modelling Language –
Overview and further work. J. Computers in Industry 61 (2009)
[15] Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2004)
16. Questions?
Constantinos Giannoulis
constantinos@dsv.su.se
http://syslab.dsv.su.se/profile/constantinos
Michael Petit
mpe@info.fundp.ac.be
http://www.fundp.ac.be/universite/personnes/page_view/01
002983/
Jelena Zdravkovic
jelenaz@dsv.su.se
http://syslab.dsv.su.se/profile/jelenaz
Notes de l'éditeur
Within systems development, (GORE) and (BMM) aim at linking stakeholders with artifacts.
The artifact should serve the purpose envisioned by stakeholders.
This relation is also addressed on a larger scale within IT alignment, where a system is implemented according to an IT strategy.
However, IT strategy is only a part of an Enterprise’s strategic alignment (Henderson & Venkatraman 1993).
Considering an enterprise comprising of a large set and subsets of stakeholders, alignment applies to business strategy covers every hierarchical organizational level, or perspective, both top-down and bottom-up.
A strategy map is a representation of the four organizational perspectives of
the Balance Scorecard framework (BSC) which presents an organization’s business activities through a number of measures typically from four organizational perspectives: financial, customer, internal, learning and growth,
A SC presents an organization’s business activities through a number of measures typically from the four perspectives, which makes it balanced (BSC) since it covers internar and external and for the four perspectives that cover all business activities
the time aspect covered in a bottom up manner suggesting that what lies on the bottom is the outcome of planning at the top and has taken place in the past.
WHY?
Facilitates in communicating direction and priorities across the enterprise, thus
creating enterprise alignment.
• Strategy balances long-term financial commitments aiming at profitable revenue
growth and short-term financial commitments aiming at cost reductions and
productivity improvements.
• Strategy is based on differentiated and clearly articulated customer value
proposition.
• Value is created through focused, effective and aligned internal business processes
grouped into four clusters: operations management, customer management,
innovation and regulatory and social.
• Strategy consists of simultaneous, complementary themes highlighting the most
critical processes supporting the customer value proposition.
• Strategic alignment determines the value and role of intangible assets: human,
information, organization.
TO-BE vs AS-IS
Strategy to be achieved vs Analyzing the current status of achievement
TO-BE
Develop a new strategy (top-down), striving for completeness as the BSC need to be complete (all four perspectives, else imbalanced)
Completeness is essential
AS-IS
Analysis of current strategy migrating into strategy maps, identify missing goals, processes, assets (they can be incomplete in their intermediate state)
The Strategy Maps class: “As-is” implies the possibility that the map is in an incomplete state.
“To-be” refers to a map representing a strategy for the future of the company, must be
Complete, for BSC “balance” requires completeness.
The distinction is made through the type attribute to distinguish between strategy
maps built for analysis and strategy maps built for strategy.
Constraints:
4 predefined perspectives
If to-be must be complete: no group or subggroup may exist without goal
The Goal class: For the internal perspective, as well as the learning and growth perspective, both processes and capital appear in a strategy map in the form of goals.
A process is executed to satisfy a goal [18]
goals are set for all groups of capital referring to particular assets aiming at desired competencies, capabilities needed
Constraints:
every goal included in a theme, also included in the SM for which the them is defined
The Causality-relation class: cause-effect relation between goals within
a strategy map and results into a tree structure of goals that when completed link goals
on all perspectives.
Constraints:
it links two goals included in the same strategy
The Group class: any grouping and any categorization of goals included in a
strategy map (e.g. internal process clusters, capital, etc.) and holds two attributes, a
name and a Boolean declaring whether the group is predefined (all groupings coming
from the strategy map template are acknowledged as predefined). custom groupings can be introduced
Sub-groups making the nesting of groups inside other groups a tree. For example, “Operations Management Process” shown on
the template is a sub-group of the “Internal Perspective” group.
Constraints:
Perspective: cannot be a subgroup of another group
not perspective: must be a subgroup of a group
not predefined: must be included in at least one strategy map (new group types must be used in a strategy map)
If to-be must be complete: no group or subggroup may exist without goal
The Perspective class refers: to the highest level of grouping within a strategy map
and is related to the Group class through generalization. Every strategy map includes
the four predefined perspectives stated earlier.
The Theme class refers to the strategic theme(s) chosen within a strategy map. A
strategic theme is a vertical slice within a strategy map that consists of a specific set
of interrelated objectives. The vertical slice is then extended to all perspectives and their
related goals are identified through the cause-effect relation.