Abstract
Variability has proved to be a central concept in different engineering domains to develop solutions that can be easily adapted to different organizational settings and different sets of customers at a low price. The MAP formalism has a high level of variability as it is expressed in an intentional manner through goals and strategies. However, a high level of variability means a high number of variation points. A process customization is then required to offer a better guidance. The Product lines have appeared with this management of variability and customization. Furthermore, we propose the Process line concept to represent the processes that may be customized to a given project. Our goal is to enhance the Map guidance by specifying the MIG (Map Indicator-based Guidance) approach. We suggest several guidance approaches based on an indicators’ typology. We illustrate our proposal with an example from the requirement engineering field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Rolland, C.: Conceptual modeling in Information systems engineering. In: Capturing system intentionality with maps (2007)
Van Gurp, J.: Variability in Software Systems, the key to Software Reuse, Licentiate Thesis, University of Groningen, Sweden (2000)
Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.: Software product line engineering: foundations, principles and techniques. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Svanberg: On the notion of variability in software product lines, working. In: IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture (2001)
Bosch, J., et al.: Variability issues in Software Product lines. In: 4th international workshop on Product Family engineering (PEE-4), Bilbao, Spain (2001)
Bachmann, F., Bass, L.: Managing variability in software architectures. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Symposium on Software Reusability (SSR 2001), pp. 126–132. ACM Press, New York (2001)
Halmans, J.: Communicating the variability of a software product family to customers. Software and system modeling. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
La Rosa, M., Dumas, M.: Configurable Process Models: How To Adopt Standard Practices In Your Own Way? BPTrends Newsletter (November 4, 2008)
Anón, A.I., Potts, C.: The use of goals to surface requirements for evolving systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Software Engineering (1998)
Yu, E.S.K., Mylopoulos, J.: Understanding “why” in software process modelling, analysis, and design. In: Proceedings of ICSE 1994, pp. 159–168 (1994)
Rolland, C., Prakash, N., Benjamen, A.: A Multi-Model View of Process Modelling. Requirements Engineering 4(4) (1999)
Rolland, C., Prakash, N.: On the Adequate Modeling of Business Process Families. In: BPMDS 2007 in conjunction with CAiSE 2007, Norway (2007)
Deneckere, R., Kornyshova, E., Rolland, C.: Enhancing the Guidance of the Intentional Model “MAP”: Graph Theory Application. In: RCIS 2009, Fes, Morocco (2009)
Prakash, N., Rolland, C.: Systems Design for requirements expressed as a map. In: Proc. of the conference IRMA 2006, Washington, DC (2006)
Kornyshova, E., Deneckère, R., Salinesi, C.: Method Chunks Selection by Multicriteria Techniques: an Extension of the Assembly-based Approach. In: ME 2007, Geneva, Switzerland (2007)
Dietz, J.L.G.: Basic Notions Regarding Business Processes and Supporting Information Systems. In: Proceedings of BPMDS 2004, CAISE 2004 Workshops Proceedings, Latvia, Riga (2004)
Ralyté, J., Rolland, C., Plihon, V.: Method Enhancement with Scenario Based Techniques. In: Jarke, M., Oberweis, A. (eds.) CAiSE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1626, pp. 103–118. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Veblen, T.: Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science? The Quarterly. Journal of Economics 12(4), 373–397 (1898)
Taylor, C.: The Explanation of Behaviour. Routledge, London (1964)
Roy, B.: Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1996)
Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)
Keeney, R.L.: Foundations for Making Smart Decisions, IIE Solutions 31(5) (1999)
Deneckere, R., Kornyshova, E., Rolland, C.: Enhancing the Guidance of the Intentional Model “MAP”: Graph Theory Application. In: RCIS 2009, Fes, Morocco (2009)
Thevenet, L.H.: Map Editor Tool for Intentional Strategic Alignment, Internal report (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Deneckère, R., Kornyshova, E. (2010). Process Line Configuration: An Indicator-Based Guidance of the Intentional Model MAP. In: Bider, I., et al. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. BPMDS EMMSAD 2010 2010. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 50. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13051-9_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13051-9_27
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13050-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13051-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)