The IT-Socket: Model-Based Business and IT Alignment
Robert Woitsch, Wilfrid Utz
Dimitris Karagiannis
BOC Asset Management GmbH Vienna, Austria
[email protected],
[email protected]
Department of Knowledge Engineering University of Vienna Vienna, Austria
[email protected]
Abstract— As a result of the ongoing evolution of IT from an enabler to an industrial sector in its own right – supporting businesses in different sectors of economy on an individual basis – alignment of Business and IT is regarded as a necessary requirement for efficient operation. This paper introduces the EU project plugIT that aims to develop an “IT-Socket” that will realize the vision of businesses “plugging-in” to IT. The results of plugIT are demonstrated within three scenarios from the IT domain that deal with: (1) “Certification” of IT infrastructure enabling regulation compliant operation of IT, (2) “Virtual Organization” aiming at evolving service orientation to a higher abstraction level focusing on business driven aspects as well as, (3) “Governance” of IT infrastructure introducing business context into distributed and complex systems applying the model-driven approach developed within the project. The paper presents the results of the first 6 months of the project within the area of use-case and application scenario development by applying the developed IT-Socket Modeling Framework as a coherent and comprehensive means for externalizing knowledge. The results achieved build up the basis for further research work related to the Semantic Kernel and implementation at the use-case partners within the Next Generation Modeling Framework. Keywords-component; Next Generation Modeling Framework, Knowledge Management, Semantics, IT-Socket, Virtual Organisation, IT-Governance, Certification
I.
INTRODUCTION
As a result of the ongoing evolution of Information Technology (IT) from an enabler to an industrial sector in its own right – supporting businesses in different sectors of economy on an individual basis – alignment of Business and IT is regarded as a necessary requirement. The trigger for this evolution is a mix of manifold aspects, like change in the regulatory environment and compliance, business requirements, economical development, and technical evolution [13] [16]. To achieve an efficient alignment between the business and IT world, the IT Governance initiatives from different bodies aim at establishing frameworks for making the alignment process manageable and bridge the evolving business contexts with IT. Provisioning of IT based on the formulated requirements of business by capitalizing on
semantic technologies in IT Governance is regarded as a promising approach to meet the alignment challenge Based on observation detailed above, the EU project plugIT - FP7-3ICT-231430 [48] aims to develop an ITSocket that will realize the vision of businesses “pluggingin” to IT. IT has evolved from back-office support, to the support of the core business process and has now reached the level of strategic differentiation [7]. Putting it differently, in industry sectors such as Airline Transport, Finance, Automotive Industry or Health Care, IT did become a decisive factor for business success [17]. plugIT aims to demonstrate the envisioned approach in three challenging application scenarios: (1) The “Certification Use Case” shows how alignment between business and IT during regulatory compliance/certification processes such as SOX [58], EuroSOX [15], ITIL® [24] [41], CoBIT® [21], ISO20000 [25] or BASEL II [3] can be achieved; (2) The “Virtual Organization Use Case” exemplifies how the plugIT vision supports business driven requirements and semantic SLA definition in intelligent interpretation and (3) The “Governance Use Case” shows the applicability of the approach for the configuration of intelligent agents in IT infrastructure monitoring of large data centers. The alignment is performed between system administration needs and intelligent discovery environments. This paper describes the first results of the IT-Socket analysis and the realization approach using models. The intended role of the semantic is introduced and the upcoming challenges for conceptual and technical integration of different models are described as an outlook. II.
THE IT-SOCKET IDEA
Industrialization, as known from various other domains, is a phenomenon that is observed in today’s IT infrastructure and can be compared with the industrialization of electricity, where electric power is provided and consumed via power sockets [20] [33]. The vision of plugIT is to develop an IT-Socket, where IT can be consumed by plugging in business in a similar way, as
electric power is used by electronic devices when plugged into a power socket [48]. In a first step, different alignment approaches that range from formal, to unstructured and up to intuitive mechanisms need to be analyzed before defining the modeling framework for the IT-Socket. The IT-Socket hypothesis is that expert knowledge can be externalized by using graphical semi-formal models, which are formalisable and hence support business and IT alignment applying smart semantic technologies. A. Relevant Work Business and IT alignment is currently in focus of a set of research initiatives and research projects focusing mainly on technical transformation, such as [11] [51], but also involving business aspects like in [5] and [53]. Although there is a set of initiatives, vendors and guidelines [55] in the research field, the business perspective is underrepresented in SOA approaches focusing on the technical level. A survey of 175 research papers about SOA from 2000 to 2008 reinforces the above statement [59]. The goal of plugIT to integrate the business perspective through providing detailed description of the alignment between business requirement specification and IT is targeted by externalization of current participants’ knowledge within the alignment process. The model-based approach used here provides a way to conceptually link business requirements and IT [28] [60]. The alignment itself is therefore described and detailed by graphical models regarded as the initial step for formalization enabling smart semantic technologies at a later stage. The key challenge in applying graphical modeling languages is their integration to describe the business and IT perspective in a coherent way. B. The Analysis of the IT-Socket The focus of the IT-Socket analysis is the identification of relevant parts of the business perspective as well as ITperspective. Relevant business parts are requirements derived from the business processes, whereas relevant ITperspective parts are provided IT-products. IT products within plugIT are regarded as a bundle of IT services that are commercially exploitable. The analysis of the IT-Socket was performed on three levels: i. expert interviews carried out with application scenario partners iTG [22], HLRS [19] and CINECA [9], ii.
complementing experiments of research partners resulting in visionary challenges for the IT-Socket from a academic perspective and
iii.
by a survey in the literature [4] [8] [12] [18] [31] [37] [39] [52] and [61].
As a result six elements have been identified to be relevant for describing the IT-Socket. These elements are separated in two horizontal perspectives and three vertical perspectives: Business Perspective: • Competence aspect: defining the competences required to correctly specify the IT products. • Technical aspect: technical requirements of the IT products. • Organizational aspect: organizational requirements to correctly specify the IT products. IT Perspective: • Competence aspect: defining the competence needed to provision of IT services. • Technical aspect: technical provisioning of IT services. • Organizational aspect: organizational dimension for the provision of IT services. Elements belonging to IT provision are allocated to the “IT-Socket”, whereas the elements that belong to the IT consumption are allocated to the “IT-Plug”. Figure 1 provides a zoom-in view on the aspects and pillars described above.
Figure 1. The Six Elements of the IT-Socket
Describing IT services the following pillars are taken into consideration: (a) IT services in form of competence provision: like service helpdesks, training for usage and implementation or consulting service, (b) IT services in form of technical provision like applications, middleware or housing as well as (c) IT services in form of organizational provision related to processes to establish IT service and operate them like maintenance processes, user administration or infrastructure monitoring. IT services defined as a bundle of the different aspects can be categorized on different abstraction layers. For example, a specific IT service such as “infrastructure housing” which is used to provide the execution environment for an infrastructure element such as a server
would be considered as being on a lower abstraction than the IT service “ERP-Application“, which is considered on a high abstraction layer. Basically the different abstraction layers indicate the “distance” of the IT service from the consuming IT transparent business process. “IT-transparent” – in the sense of the abstraction levels – means that the higher-layer regarded as the business process using the service does not need to know details of the lower layer – here the IT-Infrastructure. Consequently IT is “transparent” in the viewpoint of the business process. A concrete definition of these abstraction layers is currently not possible, as there are different abstraction layers like [56] [24] as well as client specific adaptations of the layer like in the use case of CINECA [9] and HLRS [19]. Applying the paradigm of the electric power socket, the business requirements would be seen as the “plug” that has different appearances depending on the requested abstraction layer. The challenge for the IT-Socket is therefore to provide a set of adapters – in form of semantic technology – that can ideally deal with any business plug that is plugged into the IT-Socket. The consequence is that the IT-Socket must deal with different levels of abstraction and with different classifications of abstraction. In order to address this challenge of heterogeneity in layers, the IT-Socket approach introduces as generic framework which can then adapted by each IT-Socket provider in order to address the requirements of layers utilized at the IT service provider’s site. The approach on the other hand results in IT-Sockets designed in a different way, but still facing the requirement that independent of the IT-Socket design the provided IT products need to be aligned in the same way as in any other IT-Socket. The alignment itself between the requests generated by businesses and the actual provision of IT products is performed through formalization of the business requests to such an extent that: i. the needed and appropriate abstraction layer can be identified, ii.
iii.
the IT service parameters can be described explicitly allowing discovery of the most appropriate IT service for the given business challenge and
the appropriate product framework in terms of legal aspects, responsibility, additional services like training, service, or helpdesk as well as the financial conditions can be derived. Different alignment approaches from bodies such as [1] [21] [23] [10] or [42] have been identified and analyzed. A comparison of 17 different methods to reach the alignment goal is discussed in [57]. In order to allow the usage within the model-driven IT-Socket, these approaches are distinguished in their range from formal procedures to heuristic procedures towards semi-structure or intuitive
procedures. The approach which is then selected depends on the complexity of the IT product, the competence, the organizational culture and the like resulting in an adaptable procedure model for the IT-Socket alignment. III.
THE MODEL-BASED REALISATION
The model-base realization needs to deal with different alignment approach ranging from formal and mathematic definitions of requirements [14] or [62] on the one extreme to intuitive alignments – which can be seen in many organizations - as the opposite extreme. In between these extremes there is a range of questionnaire and model based methods [30] [43] or [54], as well as communication based approaches [36] or in [50] including adaptive alignment in [2]. The model-based approach is used for the realization of the IT-Socket since relevant knowledge for business and IT can be externalized in a semi-formal and formal way using models. This simplifies the externalization of expert knowledge, as domain experts in both fields, business and IT, can use modeling languages they are familiar with in order to produce semi-formal or formal knowledge representations. A. The Six Models of the IT-Socket
Figure 2. Mapping of modelling domains to IT-Socket elements
A short overview on the definition for the elements identified is provided in the following chapter; here the content that needs to be described within the elements for the aspects and pillars described above is introduced. Figure 2 introduces the IT-Socket framework, consisting of six elements for the IT-Socket and additional two elements for enabling the description of the business and the IT perspective. In the following each of the elements is briefly discussed. i. Business: The business is described using models for different aspects such as business models, business processes, data and knowledge, business
rules and the like. The IT-Socket modeling framework separates between aspects relevant for the IT-Socket and aspects that are considered outside of the IT-Socket. As an example for this separation, a business processes that needs alignment with the underlying IT – since the process utilizes IT services - is regarded as being inside the IT-Socket. Contrary, business strategies that have no direct influence on IT services needed are considered as outside of the IT-Socket. ii.
Business Requirements: The business requirement formulates the needed IT product in terms of technical, organizational and competence aspects. The representation on this level is strongly interlinked with the selected alignment approach as defined in the introduction of this section. A formal alignment approach would establish mathematical formulas to express business requirements whereas in a heuristic alignment approach, the requirement specification may be a collection of answers to question and interview results. In an informal alignment approach unstructured text is analyzed in contrast to an intuitive alignment approach where vague expressions build up the business requirements. These two elements are interpreted as the “plug” that completes the symbol of the IT-Socket, where business is plugged into IT. The counterpart is the IT-Socket itself that is described via six elements. These six elements are now described via bottom up starting with the lowest, the infrastructure level: iii. IT for IT-Socket: The IT for IT-Socket level includes software, hardware and infrastructure required to provide the IT services. The exact border to IT that is seen as not relevant to the ITSocket and hence classified as outside the ITSocket depends on the level of detail in which ITGovernance initiatives are applied by the IT service providing organization. Commonly this level understood as “IT infrastructure” meaning infrastructure elements, network elements, and the like. iv.
v.
IT Service Technology: On top of the “IT for the IT-Socket” level IT services are identified. Services is grouped as technical IT services, such as software, hardware and IT-infrastructure related services that are offered to clients within different abstraction layer and IT-transparency. IT-Service Competence: Parallel to the technical IT service there are IT services in terms of competence provision to the customer/business such as help-desks, consulting or training. This element describes the competence related ITservice that is provided as well as the skills that are
required by the provider to handle a request. In the project a holistic view on the business and ITalignment is established; hence the IT competence provision is also seen as an IT service although these services are non-technical. vi.
IT-Service Organization: Parallel to technical and competence services, the organizational IT services that describe IT processes the IT provider is responsible for to ensure operation and usability like maintenance, backups or tests are subsumed in this block discussing the processes performed by the provider. The aforementioned elements are used to describe the IT perspective of the IT-Socket. Next two elements, describing the alignment relevant aspects considered as the business perspectives of the IT-Socket. vii. Business Alignment Competence: The IT service competence provision as defined above is enhanced with competence on business alignment. The aim is to explicitly define the skills and competences that are needed to apply an alignment method considering different approaches describing those skills in detail. viii.
Business Alignment Organization: This element defines the processes that are performed during the alignment approach select. Different methods require different description, distinguishing between mathematical models on the one extreme and intuitive actions on the other extreme. The aforementioned business requirements that are seen as the business plug, need to be correlated with the processes for the alignment that are defined in this element as well as the skills that are necessary to perform this alignment mentioned above. Applying a model-based approach, each of the elements will be described using a graphical, semi-formal models therefore resulting in different collections of modeling languages using different formal expressiveness. This leads to heterogeneous collection of different models expressed in different modeling languages in different formal levels for each user of the system. At this stage of the plugIT project a realization plan is been developed resulting in reference implementation/collections of modeling languages for the specific demonstration scenarios [47] as a concrete basis to be addressed by the research challenges of the project. B. The Semantic within the IT-Socket When applying the model-based approach to realize the IT-Socket, the user faces a set of different modeling languages each classified in different perspectives, aspects, and formalization levels depending on different modeling language families.
Therefore the main objective for applying semantic technologies is to act as mediator between the modeling languages and models, thus ensuring that requirements expressed in the business perspective in one modeling language are considered in the IT-perspective using a different modeling language with a different formal expressiveness. Models describing an element of the ITSocket can either be formal, semi-formal or unstructured. For example, there are different alignment procedures each requiring a different level of formalization of the business requirement. For the intuitive alignment, a text document is sufficient, whereas for a mathematical approach, a wellformalized description of the business requirement is needed. In order to mediate between these different descriptions, semantic technology is applied to translate models between modeling languages and levels of expressiveness. In general, the aim of information integration is to provide an integrated and coherent view of data stored in multiple, heterogeneous information sources. It is one of the core problems in modern distributed, cooperative information systems in which the ability of different components and applications to share knowledge and interoperate seamlessly is of utmost importance. According to current research results, different forms of integration can be distinguished: • Schema integration: Design a global unified schema • Data Integration: Take into account both schema and actual data • Semantic integration: Take into account ontologies, schemata and data which can be structured, unstructured or semi-structured Semantic integration uses ontologies to exemplify the semantics of data and schema. Normally they are used to identify and resolve heterogeneity problems at schema and data level, as a means for establishing explicit formal vocabulary to be shared between applications. Therefore, the goal of using ontologies within semantic integration is to overcome the problem of heterogeneity in information management. In the IT-Socket plugIT discusses three dimensions of semantic integration techniques: • Mapping discovery: Given two ontologies/schemas, how do we find similarities between them, determine which concepts and properties represent similar notions, and the like. • Declarative formal representations of mappings: Given two ontologies, how do we represent the mappings between them to enable reasoning with mappings? • Reasoning with mappings: Once the mappings are defined, what do we do with them, what types of reasoning are involved?
With those semantic integration techniques at hand, plugIT addresses the real challenges in the IT-Socket, namely: • The modeling language integration, which tries to integrate modeling languages on different levels, aspects and pillars • The translation among models • The automatic domain ontology generation from those models as a basis for information integration. For those fields the following research challenges (RC) have been identified: (RC1) The first Research Challenge (RC1) is the expression of graphical modeling languages in the form of ontological descriptions. plugIT considers the syntax and semantics of models to discover overlapping knowledge. The meaning of graphical modeling elements is expressed in a so-called Modeling Language Ontology (MLO) – a formal representation of its modeling principles. This means that a modeling language, such as Business Process Management Systems (BPMS) approach [27], Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) [44], Business Process Execution Language (BPEL) [40], etc., will be represented as an MLO specifying the modeling elements in an ontology [26]. (RC2) The second Research Challenge is the integration and translation of graphical modeling languages. The comparison and transformation between modeling languages need to consider syntactic and semantic layers, which have to be compared with respect to their meanings [32] [38]. While ontologies for semantic description are currently standard, the syntactic layer also needs a description which will be developed in RC1. The representative ontology is used as a reference ontology to enable the mapping from source modeling languages into target languages (comp. [6] [34] [35] [49]). (RC3) The third Research Challenge is building reference ontologies for the modeling languages. The ITSocket will investigate the appropriate expressive power of a reference ontology that is required to allow explicitly the transformation between modeling languages. The meta-meta modeling approach (meta2) [27] – like Meta-Object Facility (MOF) [45] or ADONIS [29] – is used to describe the elements of the modeling languages (for details on meta model integration and morphing see [32] [38]). For example on meta-meta level generic modeling elements are defined like “Modeling Object”, the “Relation” or “Attribute”. The modeling languages (on meta level) describe the elements as derivations like “Activity”, “Process Start”, or ”Process End” as modeling objects and the name and description of the activity as a modeling attribute. (RC4) The fourth Research Challenge is the automatic generation of machine interpretable domain ontologies out of graphical models. The created models need to become meaningful in the same manner as the modeling languages become meaningful. Therefore, a model ontology (MO) is generated out of the graphical models, where each model is automatically annotated with the corresponding MLO.
(RC5) The fifth Research Challenge is the translation between domain ontologies. Assuming the generation of different business and IT domain ontologies out of models, it is reasonable to identify mechanisms that translate between the business domain ontology and the IT domain ontology using the corresponding MLO and the Conceptual Reference Ontology (CRO) as the bridge. This enables the business expert to view knowledge, which has been expressed by the IT-expert in the modeling language the business expert is used to and vice versa. This approach enables to communicate the knowledge in the graphical representation the viewer is familiar with and evaluate results of translation and mappings. The research challenges identified are targeted by the research partners in the consortium and resulting in the implementation of the so-called Semantic Kernel for the Next Generation Modeling Framework. IV.
(Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz) for their contribution to this publication. REFERENCES [1]
[2]
[3] [4]
[5]
[6]
CONCLUSION
This article introduced the so-called IT-Socket that enables business and IT alignment using a model-based approach, which is currently implemented by the consortium of the EU research project plugIT. The project is co-funded by the European Commission and started in March 2009; this article therefore introduced the vision and the approaches of the project and provides initial results of the IT-Socket analysis. The role of semantic within plugIT has been drafted, relating the results of the IT-Socket analysis to the research challenges identified. Further investigation on the challenges will result in concrete research results based on industrial case-studies within the coming month. The use of semantic and meta modeling matching patterns [32] is seen as the conceptual integration approach to be investigated in detail. The use of service oriented architecture for the technical realization of the Next Generation Modeling Framework is seen as the technical integration platform. The Next Generation Modeling Framework is made available publicly enabling assessment of reference models of different IT-Socket realizations as well design an own ITSocket. Following the Open Model paradigm, the modeling portal aims to attract a community to collaboratively design an ITSocket at the web-modeling platform and use the executive environment available in order to deploy the IT-Socket. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to thank the members of Elsag Datamat, Consorzio Interuniversitario CINECA, Innovation Technology Group SA and University of Stuttgart, High Performance Computer Centre as members of the plugIT consortium for the cooperation of this publication. The authors especially acknowledge the contribution from Prof. Dr. Plexousakis (Foundation for Research and Technology-Hellas) and Prof. Dr. Hinkelmann
[7] [8] [9] [10]
[11]
[12]
[13] [14]
[15]
[16]
[17] [18]
[19]
[20] [21]
ACS, “Governance of Information and Communication Technology Committee”. Available at: http://www.acs.org.au/governance/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 Andrea, J., “An Agile Request For Proposal (RFP) Process. ADC '03: Proceedings of the Conference on Agile Development”, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2003 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, http://www.bis.org Accessed: 4 September 2009 Bloomberg, J., “SOA Governance – IT Governance in the context of service orientation”, Available at: http://www.zapthink.com/report.html?id=ZAPFLASH-10272004, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2004 BREIN, “Business objective driven REliable and Intelligent grids for real busiNess”. Available at: http://www.eu-brein.com/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D., and Rosati, R., “Description Logic Framework for Information Integration, International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR)” , 1998, pp. 2-13 Carr, N.G., “IT doesn’t matter” Harvard Business R, BCG Analysis, 2003 Charlsworth, I. and Davis, D., “Getting to grips with SOA governance. Ovum Report #040077”, 2006-23, 2006 CINECA, Consorzio Interuniversitario, http://www.cineca.it Accessed 9 September 2009 CISR, “Center for Information Systems Research”. Available at: http://mitsloan.mit.edu/cisr/research.php, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 COMPAS, “Compliance-driven Models, Languages, and Architectures for Services”. Available at: http://www.compas-ict.eu/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 Dostal, W., Jeckle, M., Melzer, I. and Zengler, B., “Serviceorientierte Architekturen mit Web Services: Konzepte - Standards Praxis. 2nd ed. München: Spekturm Akademischer Verlag.”, 2007 EITO, in cooperation with IDC, European Information Technology Observation, http://www.eito.com, Accessed: 04 April, 2008, 2006 Esswein, W., Weller, J., Stark, J. and Juhrisch, M., “Identifikation von Sevices aus Geschäftsprozessmodellen durch automatisierte Modellanalyse.“ Proceedings of WI 2009, pp. 513 522, Available at: http://www.dke.univie.ac.at/wi2009/Tagungsband_8f9643f/Band2.pd f, Accessed 15 May 2009, 2009 European Commission, Internal Market Auditing, http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/auditing/index_en.htm, Accessed 4 September 2009, 2009 Forrester Research, European IT Services, http://www.forrester.com/ Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,38932,00.html, Accessed: 4 April 2009, 2007 Guide Share Europe, “IT Value Delivery”, Working Group “IT Governance”, 2007 Hedin, M., “SOA-Driven Organizational Change Management: A Market Trends and Vendor Landscape Analysis of Major Service Players to Address this Emerging Opportunity. IDC Competitive Analysis #204727”, 2006 HLRS, High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart, http://www.hlrs.de Accessed 9 September 2009 Hochstein, A., Ebert, N., Uebernickel, F. and Brenner, W., “ITIndustrialisierung: Was ist das?“, Computerwoche, 15, 2007 ISACA, “Information Systems Audit and Control Association”. Available at: http://www.isaca.org/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009
[22] ITG, Innovation Technology Group SA, http://www.itg.pl Accessed 9 September 2009 [23] ITGI, IT Governance Institute. Available at: http://www.itgi.org, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [24] ITIL, IT Infrastructure Library. Available at: http://www.itil-officialsite.com/home/home.asp, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [25] ISO, ISO/IEC 20000 Available at: http://www.iso.org, Accessed: 4 September 2009 [26] Kappel, G., Kapsammer, E., Kargl, H., Kramler, G., Reiter, T., Retschitzegger, W., Schwinger, W., and Wimmer, M., “On Models and Ontologies – A Layered Approach for Model-based Tool Integration. In Mayr, H. C. and Breu, R., editors, Modellierung 2006”, 2006, pages 11–27. [27] Karagiannis, D., Höfferer, P., “Metamodels in Action: An overview, In: J. Filipe and B. Shishkov and M. Helfert (Eds.), ICSOFT 2006 First International Conference on Software and Data Technologies:IS27-36. Setúbal: Insticc Press”, 2006 [28] Karagiannis, D., Utz, W., Woitsch, R. and Eichner, H., „BPM4SOA Business Process Models for Semantic Service-Oriented Infrastructures. In eChallenges e-2008. Stockholm, Sweden: IOS Press”, 2008 [29] Karagiannis, D., Kühn, H.: Metamodelling Platforms. Invited Paper. In: Bauknecht, K.; Min Tjoa, A.; Quirchmayer, G. (Eds.): Proceedings of the Third International Conference EC-Web 2002 – Dexa 2002, Aix-en-Provence, France, September 2-6, 2002,LNCS 2455, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, p. 182. [30] Kätker, S. and Patig, S., „Model-Driven Development of ServiceOriented Busienss Application Systems. Proceeding of Wirtschaftsinformatik 2009”, 2009, pp. 171-180, Available at: http://www.dke.univie.ac.at/wi2009/Tagungsband_8f9643f/Band1.pd f, Accessed 29 May 2009 [31] Kohnke, O., Scheffler, T. and Hock, C., „SOA-Governance – Ein Ansatz zum Management serviceorientierter Architekturen. Wirtschaftsinfor”, 50(5), 2008, pp.408-12. [32] Kühn, H., „Methodenintegration im Business Engineering, PhD Thesis”, 2004 [33] Lamberti, H.-J., “Banken Technologie als Schlüssel für die Bank der Zukunft. Leistung aus Leidenschaft Deutsche Bank” Available at: http://wi2009.at/fileadmin/templates/downloads/2009_0227_Lambert i_WI2009_Wien_Versand.pdf, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [34] Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R., „Review on models and systems for information integration“, Technical Report ,Universita di Roma “La Sapienza”, 2002 [35] Manakanatas, D. and Plexousakis, D., “A Tool for Semi-Automated Semantic Schema Mapping: Design and Implementation. Proceedings of the Int. Workshop on Data Integration and the Semantic Web (DISWeb-06)”, 2006, pp. 290-306. [36] Mhay, S., “Request for. Procurement Processes (RFT RFQ RFP RFI)”, 2009 Available at: http://www.negotiations.com/articles/procurement-terms/, Accessed 29 May 2009 [37] Mitra, P., Noy, N. and Jaiswal, A.R., “OMEN: A Probabilistic Ontology Mapping Tool, Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-05)”, 2005, pp. 537-547. [38] Murzek, M. “The Model Morphing Approach - Horizontal Transformation of Business Process Models, PhD Thesis”, 2008 [39] OASIS, “OASIS”. Available at: www.oasis-open.org, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [40] OASIS, “BPEL 2.0 Specification” Available at http://docs.oasisopen.org/wsbpel/2.0/OS/wsbpel-v2.0-OS.html, Accessed: 4 September 2009 [41] OGC, “ITIL”, http://www.ogc.gov.uk/guidance_itil.asp Accessed: 4 September 2009
[42] OCG, “AK IT-Governance – Aufgaben und Ziele“. Available at: http://www.ocg.at/ak/governance/index.html, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [43] Offmann, P., “SOAM – Eine Methode zur Konzeption betrieblicher Software mit einer Serviceorientierten Architektur. Wirtschaftsinformatik”, 50(6), 2008, pp.461-71. [44] OMG, “BPMN 1.2 Specification” Available at http://www.bpmn.org/ Accessed 4 September 2009 [45] OMG, “MOF” Available at http://www.omg.org/mof/ Accessed 4 September 2009 [46] plugIT D2.1, “Use Case Analysis and Evaluation Criteria Specification”, http://plug-itproject.eu/CMS/ADOwebCMS/upload/plugIT_D2.1_Use_Case_Desc ription_Evaluation.pdf, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [47] plugIT D5.1, “Use Case Modelling And Demonstration”, http://plugitproject.eu/CMS/ADOwebCMS/upload/plugIT_D5.1_Use_Case_Mod elling_Demonstration.pdf, Accessed 31 August 2009, 2009 [48] plugIT, EU-Project FP7-3ICT-231430, plugIT HomePage, http://www.plug-it.org, Accessed 29 May 2009; 2009 [49] Rahm, E. and Bernstein, P.A., “A Survey of Approaches to Automatic Schema Matching”. The VLDB Journal , 10(4), 2001, pp. 334-350 [50] Shawn, J., “Beyond the Template: Writing a RFP that Works”. Available at: http://www.sourcingmag.com/content/c070228a.asp, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [51] SOA4ALL, “Service Oriented Architectures for All”. Available at: http://www.soa4all.eu, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [52] Strohm, O. and Ulich, E., “Unternehmen arbeitspsychologisch bewerten: ein Mehr-Ebenen-Ansatz unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Mensch, Technik und Organisation.“, Zürich: Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH, 1997 [53] SUPER, “Semantics Utilized for Process Management within and between Enterprises.”, Available at: http://www.ip-super.org/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [54] TEC, “Technology Evaluation Centers.”, Available at: http://www.technologyevaluation.com, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [55] Teubner, A. and Feller, T., “Governance und Compliance. Wirtschaftsinformatik”, 50(5), 2008, pp.400-07. [56] The Open Group, “TOGAF Version 9”, Available at: http://www.opengroup.org/togaf/, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2009 [57] Thomas, O., Leyking, K. and Scheid, M., „Vorgehensmodelle zur Entwicklung Serviceorientierter Softwaresysteme. Proceedings of Wirtschaftsinformatik 2009”, 2009, pp. 181-190, Available at: www.dke.univie.ac.at/wi2009/Tagungsband_8f9643f/Band1.pdf, Accessed 29 May 2009 [58] U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “Sarbanes Oxley Act” http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/soa2002.pdf, Accessed: 4 September 2009 [59] Viering, G., Legner, C. and Ahlemann, F., „The (Lacking) Business Perspective on SOA - Critical Themes in SOA Research. Proceedings of Wirtschaftsinformatik 2009”, 2009, pp. 45-54, Available at: http://www.dke.univie.ac.at/wi2009/Tagungsband_8f9643f/Band1.pd f, Accessed 29 May 2009 [60] Willcocks, L.P. and Lacity, M.C., “Global Sourcing of Business & IT Services. New York”, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006 [61] Windley, P.J., “Teaming up for SOA. InfoWorld” Available at: http://www.infoworld.com/t/architecture/teaming-soa-620, Accessed 29 May 2009, 2007 [62] Zimmermann, S., “Governance im IT-Portfoliomanagement – Ein Ansatz zur Berücksichtigung von Strategic Alignment bei der Bewertung von IT. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 5”, 2008, pp.357-65.
