Service oriented Enterprise Architecture for Enterprise Engineering Selmin Nurcan1, 2
Rainer Schmidt3
Centre de Recherche en Informatique 2 Business School of Sorbonne University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne Paris, France
[email protected]
HTW-Aalen Aalen, Germany
[email protected]
1
I.
POSITION STATEMENT
There is a more and more common understanding, that not the ownership of IT resources but their management is the foundation for sustainable competitive advantage [1]. According to [2], smart companies define how they (will) do business (using an operating model) and design the processes and infrastructure critical to their current and future operations (using an enterprise architecture). Leading enterprises in the U.S. derive more than 50% of their revenues from services [3]. Through services, enterprises stabilize their revenues [4]. This applies not only to pure services such as transportation but also for material products that are augmented by services such as maintenance, consulting and training. By exchanging services within partnerships, enterprises are able to combine their competences and thus provide solutions to the customer not possible for the single enterprise. The management of information technology resources should be done with the application of engineering principles, called enterprise engineering. Enterprise engineering is the application of engineering principles to the design, restructuring and operation of enterprises and their cooperation with other enterprises. It allows deriving the Enterprise Architecture from the enterprise goals and strategy and aligning it with the enterprise resources; in turn Enterprise Architecture, if it is documented, may facilitate enterprise engineering. Enterprise architecture [2], [5] aims (i) to understand the interactions and all kind of articulations between business and information technology, (ii) to define how to align business components and IT components, as well as business strategy and IT strategy, and more particularly (iii) to develop and support a common understanding and sharing of those purposes of interest. Enterprise architecture is used to map the enterprise goal and strategy to the enterprise’s resources (actors, assets, IT supports) and to take into account the evolution of this mapping. It also provides documentation on the assignment of enterprise resources to the enterprise goals and strategy. To this end, advantageous patterns (best practices) can be reused and alternative design solutions can be compared. Furthermore, enterprise architecture may be checked for compliance
with laws, regulatory rules etc. Finally, enterprise architecture facilitates the measurement the performance and efficiency of the resources used. There are different paradigms for developing enterprise architecture. The most important regarding the purpose of this workshop is to encapsulate the functionalities provided by IT supported resources as services. By this means, it is possible to clearly describe the contributions of those resources both in terms of functionality and quality and to define a service oriented enterprise architecture. Furthermore, service-oriented enterprise architecture easily integrates widespread technological approaches such as SOA or emerging ones as the cloud computing because they also use service as structuring paradigm. Serviceoriented enterprise engineering further develops the enterprise engineering approach selecting service as governing paradigm. The enterprise goals and strategies are also mapped to a service oriented enterprise architecture. By exchanging services within partnerships, enterprises are able to combine their competences and thus provide solutions to the customer not possible for the single enterprise. Service-oriented enterprise architecture differentiates four layers of services: Business, Software, Platform and Infrastructure. Thus, its scope is much broader than the scope of the service-oriented architecture (SOA) and also includes services not accessible through software such as business and infrastructure services. Services of different layers may be interconnected in service (value) nets to provide higher-level services. II.
GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of the workshop is to develop concepts and methods to assist the engineering and the management of service oriented enterprise architectures and the software systems supporting them. Especially three themes of research have been pursued: 1. Alignment of the enterprise goals and strategies with the service-oriented enterprise architecture 2. Design of the service-oriented enterprise architecture 3. Mapping of service-oriented enterprise architecture to enterprise resources
III.
MAIN ORGANIZATIONAL ASPECTS
SoEA4EE workshop is a full day workshop in conjunction with EDOC’2011. We received 17 submissions from Finland, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Morocco, The Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, and Taiwan. All of them have been peer-reviewed by three members of the international program committee. Eight full papers and one position paper have been presented during the SoEA4EE’11 workshop. A. Papers presented at SoEA4EE’2011 The first paper, Using Role Knowledge for Service Configuration in SOA-based Enterprise Representation, explores the use of knowledge about organizational roles captured in enterprise models. Kurt Sandkuhl, Ulf Seigerroth, Alexander Smirnov, Tatiana Levashova and Nikolay Shilov investigate a different perspective of enterprise modeling by capturing the use of knowledge about organizational roles. Based on a motivating case from industry, authors present a way for extracting a role’s information demand and for using this as initial configuration for agent based services and the implementation of a service-based architecture. The main contributions of this paper are (1) to show that a role’s information demand is relevant for service configuration; (2) to present a way of extracting information demand from enterprise models; and (3) to extend the presented approach for SOA-based enterprise representation with information demand. The second paper, Value-Based Service Bundling: A Customer-Supplier Approach, shows how customers can help to dynamically bundle services, using an approach based on customer and supplier perspectives. A broker is in charge of matching both perspectives, depicting not only customer desires but also supplier offerings. Even though service networks represent a flexible and dynamic way for service delivering, yet some knowledge gaps exist, specially regarding strategic bundling of services and value (co)creation within the network. Such networks can provide specific service solutions in response to customer needs and they include three components: customers, suppliers and enablers [6]. Ivan S. Razo-Zapata, Pieter De Leenheer and Jaap Gordijn argue that service bundling mainly involves relationships between the first two components, this is where different strategies might emerge. To face these challenges, they model the customer and supplier perspectives. Whereas customers express their needs through a laddering process in which needs are refined into consequences, suppliers offer valuable resources that can pro- vide the desired consequences. Authors focus on automating the bundling of services that fulfil customer needs in a multi-supplier setting. The third paper, Healthcare Software as a Service: the greater Paris region program experience, from Pierre Boiron and Valère Dussaux, presents the "Région Sans Film" ("Filmless Region") program that was launched in 2009 by the French ministry of health in order to help the
generalization to all healthcare structures such as hospitals or general physician practices, of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS), Radiological Information Systems (RIS) and archiving of medical images. This platform implements the latest technologies of medical image processing and of cloud computing. It is built in order to support service-oriented enterprise architecture composed of one main layer of software services. It is innovative because it is the first one, which contains all the materials for the implementation of all services in the cloud, allowing for each healthcare structure to open these services beyond its borders. The fourth paper, A QoS-Aware Job Rescheduling Mechanism for Service-Oriented Media Distribution Systems, presents a system, which was implemented by the Taiwan’s Public Television Service (PTS) in an effort to improve the effectiveness of daily operation. This system is currently providing complete support to the company’s daily operations. The solution developed by Ing-Yi Chen and Guo-Kai Ni also addresses a real industrial problem: the past few years have seen a dramatic rise in the distribution channels available to media companies. While media companies once distributed their programming through one or two mediums, such as TV broadcasts and video tapes, the same programming is now also distributed through additional mediums such as the Internet and mobile phones. As a result, the IT systems of these companies are required to handle both new content formats and to ensure that content is simultaneously and successfully prepared in order to meet scheduling and distribution requirements for multiple delivery pathways. Since implementation, the automated process increased the average number of transcoding jobs completed daily from 500 to 700 – and increase of 40 percent. The fifth paper, A Maturity Model for Implementing ITIL V3 in Practice, is concerned by IT Service Management (ITSM) which is the discipline striving to a better the alignment of IT efforts to business needs and to an efficient provision of IT services with guaranteed quality. Although there are many other frameworks, the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) has become the most popular for implementing ITSM. Organizations aspire to deliver services more efficiently and effectively, with more quality and less cost [7]. In this paper, Ruben Pereira and Miguel Mira Da Silva illustrates a practical application of a maturity model they developed previously with a questionnaire to assess the Incident Management and Configuration Management processes as well as the Service Desk Function. They evaluated the questionnaires in 13 assessments in five Portuguese organizations and then implemented a prototype to support the assessments. The sixth paper, From Business Process to Component Architecture: Engineering Business to IT Alignment, from Karim Dahman, Francois Charoy and Claude Godart, develops the thesis that maintaining the alignment between
Business and IT is of high strategic relevance in today’s enterprise roadmap. Authors advocate that this alignment will be better maintained if we are able to ensure a clear alignment between Business processes and Software architecture. As their aim is to provide an environment that would flawlessly support changes of the process or of the architecture while maintaining this alignment, they build on the formal foundation that they have developed to ensure it and show how it can be actually developed with current Model Driven Engineering technologies. The seventh paper, Flexible SOA Lifecycle on the Cloud using SCA, from Cristian Ruz, Francoise Baude, Bastien Sauvan, Adrian Mos and Alain Boulze, presents an integrated approach to design, monitor and manage the lifecycle of applications based on the Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) principles and capable of taking advantage of cloud computing environments. The integrated framework takes profit of publicly available open source tools and standards in an effective and coherent way, and covers the steps from business and architectural design of the application, to deployment and runtime support. The eighth paper, Privacy Preservation Approach in Service Ecosystems, is related increased exchange of sensitive information and creation of behavior traces in the network due to the e mergence of business networking and social networking. Yiyun Shen, Markus Miettinen, Pirjo Moen and Lea Kutvonen argue that he current computing and communication solutions do not provide sufficient conceptual, architectural or technical facilities to preserve privacy while collaborating in the network. This paper enhances definition on privacy-related concepts to become sufficient for open service ecosystems, and finally introduces a privacy-preservation architecture with emphasis on usability, sustainability against threats, and reasonable cost of establishment and utilization. As this architecture introduces new categories of tools for privacy preservation, it is significant also as a roadmap or maturity model. Finally, the ninth paper, A Service-System based Identification of Meta-services for Service-Oriented Enterprise Architecture, from Rainer Schmidt, introduces meta-Services as services acting upon services. Metaservices allow representing management functions associated with services and thus can control the lifecycle of the services. The authors advocate that there is no method to enumerate meta-services. He proposes, a first step towards a method by introducing service-systems as the foundation for the enumeration of meta-services. Metaservices can thus be identified in a systematical way using service-systems to extend service-oriented enterprise architecture. This paper develops also the thesis that, the use of meta-services and service-system facilitates the management of enterprise architectures using external services such as cloud-services.
B. Programme. The nine papers are organized under four sessions: - Enterprise Modeling leading to a valuable Serviceoriented Architecture (1 & 2) - Service orientation: a way to improve the business efficiency? (3 & 4) - Service orientation in pursuit of the new Graal: Business/IT alignment and maturity assessment (5 & 6) - What is the next step after Service oriented Enterprise Engienering ? Let's strive for service ecosystems and cloud computing (7, 8 & 9) C. Organizers Selmin Nurcan is Associate Professor at the Business School of the University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne and a senior researcher at the ‘Centre de Recherche en Informatique’ (CRI). She has a Ph.D and an engineering degree in Computer Science. Her research activities include enterprise computing, business process management, change modeling, and business/IS alignment, process (re)engineering and IS engineering and CSCW. Selmin Nurcan is also co-organizer of the BPMDS workshop series at CAISE and the BPMS2 workshop at BPM and member of IFIP WG 8.1. She is acting as a program committee member of a number of international conferences and serving on the editorial board of numerous International Journals. She has been a guest editor of a number of journal special issues related to business process modeling, development and support, and to enterprise and information systems modeling. Rainer Schmidt is Professor for business information systems at Aalen University. He has a Ph.D. and an engineering degree in Computer Science. His current research areas are service science, business process management, social software and the integration of these themes. Rainer Schmidt is co-organizer of the BPMDS workshop series at CAISE, the BPMS2 workshop at BPM and member of the program committee of several workshops and conferences. Rainer Schmidt is serving on the editorial boards of International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector and International Journal on Advances in Internet Technology. Rainer Schmidt applies his research in a number of projects and cooperations with industry. He has industrial experience as management consultant and researcher. IV.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to thank all authors for having shared their work with us, as well as the members of the SoEA4EE’2011 Program committee and the workshop organizers of EDOC 2011 for their help with the organization of the workshop.
REFERENCES [1]
F.J. Mata, W.L. Fuerst, und J.B. Barney, “Information Technology and Sustained Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based Analysis,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 19, Dec. 1995, S. 487-505.
[2]
J.W. Ross, P. Weill, und D. Robertson, Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution, Harvard Business School Press, 2006. G. Allmendinger und R. Lombreglia, “Four strategies for the age of smart services,” Harvard business review, vol. 83, Okt. 2005, S. 131-4, 136, 138 passim M.A. Cusumano, The business of software, Free Press, A. Wegmann, “Systemic Enterprise Architecture Methodology (SEAM),” SEAM). Published at the International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems 2003 (ICEIS 2003, Citeseer, 2003, S. 483-490. R. C. Basole and W. B. Rouse. Complexity of service value networks: conceptualization and empirical investigation. IBM Syst. J., 47:53–70, January 2008. Hochstein, A., Zarnekow, R., Brenner, W, “ITIL as common practice reference model for IT service management: Formal assessment and implications for practice,” in: e-Technology, e-Commerce and e- Service, 2005. EEE '05. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference, pp. 704 – 710. IEEE Press (2005)
[3] [4] [5]
[6] [7]
SOEA4EE’2011 PROGRAM COMMITTEE João Paulo A. Almeida - Federal Univ. of Espírito Santo, Brazil Judith Barrios - Universidad de Los Andes, Venezuela Khalid Benali - LORIA, Nancy, France Ilia Bider - IbisSoft, Sweden Joao Falcao e Cunha, University of Porto, Portugal Chiara Francalanci - Politechnico Milano, Italy Xavier Franch - Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, Spain Francois Habryn - KSRI, Germany Sung-Kook Han - Won Kwang University, South Korea Ron Kenett - KPA Ltd., Israel Peter Kueng - Crédit Suisse, Switzerland Marc Lankhorst - Novay, The Netherlands Michel Léonard University of Geneva - Switzerland Lin Liu - Tsinghua University, Beijing, China Hui Ma - Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand Florian Matthes - Technical University Munich, Germany Selmin Nurcan - Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne, France Erik Proper - Public Research Centre - Henri Tudor, The Netherlands Gil Regev - EPFL & Itecor, Switzerland Sebastian Richly - University Dresden, Germany Dominique Rieu - LIG, Université de Grenoble, France Colette Rolland - Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne, France Michael Rosemann - Queensland Univ. of Technology, Australia Shazia Sadiq - University of Queensland, Australia Gerhard Satzger - Karlsruhe Service Research Institute, Germany Rainer Schmidt - Aalen University, Germany James C. Spohrer - IBM Almaden Research Center, CA, USA Michael zur Muehlen – Stevens Institute of Technology, USA
