Negotiating Models

1. AMICE: CIMOSA: Open System Architecture for CIM, 2nd revised and extended version. Springer, Berlin (1993)

   Google Scholar 

2. Barker, R.: CASE*Method: Entity-Relationship Modelling. Addison-Wesley, Wokingham (1990)

   Google Scholar 

3. Bernus, P., Nemes, L.: A Framework to Define a Generic Enterprise Reference Architecture and Methodology. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 9, 179–191 (1996)

   Article  Google Scholar 

4. Goldkuhl, G., Röstlinger, A.: Joint elicitation of problems: An important aspect of change analysis. In: Avison, D.E., Kendall, J.E., DeGross, J.I. (eds.) Human, organizational and social dimensions of Information systems development. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 107–125 (1993)

   Google Scholar 

5. Menzel, C., Mayer, R.J.: The IDEF Family of Languages. In: Bernus, P., Mertins, K., Schmidt, G. (eds.) Handbook on Architectures for Information Systems, pp. 209–241. Springer, Berlin (1998)

   Google Scholar 

6. Ould, M.: Business Process Management: A Rigorous Approach. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, FL (2005)

   Google Scholar 

7. Roboam, M., Zanettin, M., Pun, L.: GRAI-IDEF0-Merise (GIM): integrated methodology to analyse and design manufacturing systems. Computer-Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2, 82–98 (1989)

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Scheer, A.-W.: ARIS - Business Process Modeling. Springer, Berlin (1999)

   Google Scholar 

9. Williams, T.J.: The Purdue enterprise reference architecture. Computers in Industry 24, 141–158 (1994)

   Article  Google Scholar 

10. Bennet, S., McRobb, S., Farmer, R.: Object-Oriented Systems Analysis and Design. McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead (1999)

    Google Scholar 

11. Introna, L.D., Whitley, E.A.: Against method: exploring the limits of method. Logistics Information Management 10, 235–245 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

12. Morris, W.T.: On the Art of Modeling. Management Science 13, 707–717 (1967)

    Google Scholar 

13. Srinivasan, A., Te´eni, D.: Modeling as Constrained Problem Solving: An Empirical Study of the Data Modeling Process. Management Science 41, 419–434 (1995)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

14. Willemain, T.R.: Insights on Modeling from a Dozen Experts. Operations Research 42, 213–222 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

15. Willemain, T.R.: Model Formulation: What Experts Think about and When. Operations Research 43, 916–932 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

16. Bommel, P., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A.E., v.d. Weide, T.P.: Exploring Modelling Strategies in a Meta-modelling Context. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2006: CoopIS, DOA, GADA, and ODBASE. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 1128–1137. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

17. Frederiks, P.J.M., v. d Weide, T.P., v.d. Weide, T.P.: Information Modeling: the process and the required competencies of its participants. Data & Knowledge Engineering 58, 4–20 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

18. Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Lindeman, L., Proper, H.A.: Capturing Modeling Processes - Towards the MoDial Modeling Laboratory. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2006: CoopIS, DOA, GADA, and ODBASE. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 1242–1252. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

19. Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A., Weide, T.P.: v.d.: Formal Modelling as a Grounded Conversation. In: Goldkuhl, G., Lind, M., Haraldson, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Working Conference on the Language Action Perspective on Communication Modelling (LAP‘05), Kiruna, Sweden. Linköpings Universitet and Högskolan i Borås, Linköping and Borås, pp. 139–155 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

20. Persson, A.: Enterprise Modelling in Practice: Situational Factors and their Influence on Adopting a Participative Approach. Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (2001)

    Google Scholar 

21. Ericsson, K., Simon, H.: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. MIT Press, Boston (1993)

    Google Scholar 

22. Stamper, R.: The Semiotic Framework for Information Systems Research. In: Nissen, H., Klein, H., Hirschheim, R. (eds.) Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 515–517 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

23. Keller, F., Wendt, S.: FMC: An Approach Towards Architecture-Centric System Development. In: Keller, F., Wendt, S. (eds.) 10th IEEE Symposium and Workshop on Engineering of Computer Based Systems, pp. 173–182. IEEE Computer Society, Pasadena, CA (2003)

    Google Scholar 

24. OMG: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification. OMG, Needham, MA (2004)

    Google Scholar 

25. OMG: Unified Modeling Language: Infrastructure. OMG, Needham, MA (2006)

    Google Scholar 

26. Dietz, J.L.G.: Understanding and modeling business processes with DEMO. In: Akoka, J., Bouzeghoub, M., Comyn-Wattiau, I., Métais, E. (eds.) ER 1999, pp. 188–202. Springer, Berlin (1999)

    Google Scholar 

27. Boehm, B., Grunbacher, P., Briggs, R.O.: Developing Groupware for Requirements Negotiation: Lessons Learned. IEEE Software 18, 46–55 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

28. Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, G.J., Nunamaker, J.: Collaboration Engineering with Thinklets to Pursue Sustained Success with Group Support Systems. Journal of MIS 19, 31–63 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

29. Conklin, J., Selvin, A., Buckingham Shum, S., Sierhuis, M.: Facilitated Hypertext for Collective Sensemaking: 15 Years on from gIBIS. In: Weigand, H., Goldkuhl, G., de Moor, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Working Conference on the Language-Action Perspective on Communication Modeling (LAP’03), Tilburg, The Netherlands (2003)

    Google Scholar 

30. Aiken, M., Vanjani, M., Krosp, J.: Group decision support systems. Review of Business 16, 38–42 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

31. Bamber, E.M., Watson, R.T., Hill, M.C.: The effects of group support system technology on audit group decision-making. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15, 122–134 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

32. Benbasat, I., Lim, L.H.: The effects of group, task, context, and technology variables on the usefulness of group support systems: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Small Group Research 24, 430–462 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

33. Bidgoli, H.: A new productivity tool for the 90’s: Group support systems. Journal of Systems Management 47, 56–62 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

34. Burke, K., Chidambaram, L., Lock, J.: Evolution of relational factors over time: A study of distributed and non-distributed meetings.In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 4, pp. 14–23 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

35. Cass, K., Heintz, T.J., Kaiser, K.M.: Using a voice-synchronous GDSS in dispersed locations: A preliminary analysis of participant satisfaction. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 3, pp. 555–563 ( (1991)

    Google Scholar 

36. Chudoba, K.M.: Appropriations and patterns in the use of group support systems. Database for Advances in Information Systems 30, 131–148 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

37. Fjermestad, J., Hiltz, S.R.: An assessment of group support systems experiment research: Methodology and results. Journal of Management Information Systems 15, 7–149 (1998/1999)

    Google Scholar 

38. Jackson, N.F., Aiken, M.W.V., Mahesh, B.H., Bassam, S.: Support group decisions via computer systems. Quality Progress 28, 75–78 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

39. Townsend, A.M., Whitman, M.E., Hendrickson, A.R.: Computer support system adds power to group processes. HRMagazine 40, 87–91 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

Download references