GRAI integrated methodology and its mapping onto generic enterprise reference architecture and methodology

Chen, D.; Vallespir, Bruno; Doumeingts, Guy

doi:10.1016/s0166-3615(97)00043-2

Cited by 91 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The integrated methodology GRAI/GIM [47,48] explicitly models performance indicators. They establish three parameters or attributes to define performance indicators: name, value domain or dimension and procedure to calculate the value.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators

del–Río–Ortega

Resinas

Cabanillas

et al. 2013

Information Systems

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cite this article as: Adela del-Río-Ortega, Manuel Resinas, Cristina Cabanillas and Antonio Ruiz-Cortés, On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators, Information Systems, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.is. 2012.11.004 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. AbstractA key aspect in any process-oriented organisation is the evaluation of process performance for the achievement of its strategic and operational goals. Process Performance Indicators (PPIs) are a key asset to carry out this evaluation, and, therefore, having an appropriate definition of these PPIs is crucial. After a careful review of the literature related and a study of the current picture in different real organisations, we conclude that there not exists any proposal that allows to define PPIs in a way that is unambiguous and highly expressive, understandable by technical and non-technical users and traceable with the business process (BP). In addition, like other activities carried out during the BP lifecycle, the management of PPIs is considered timeconsuming and error-prone. Therefore, providing an automated support for them is very appealing from a practical point of view.In this paper, we propose the PPINOT metamodel, which allows such an advanced definition of PPIs and is independent of the language used to model the business process. Furthermore, we provide an automatic semantic mapping from the metamodel to Description Logics (DLs) that allows the implementation of design-time analysis operations in such a way that DL $ This work has been partially supported by the European Commission (FEDER), Spanish Government under the CICYT projects SETI (TIN2009-07366) and TAPAS (TIN2012-32273); and projects THEOS (TIC-5906) and ISABEL (P07-TIC-2533) funded by the Andalusian local Government.* Corresponding author. Tel +34954557001 Email addresses: adeladelrio@us.es (Adela del-Río-Ortega), resinas@us.es (Manuel Resinas), cristinacabanillas@us.es (Cristina Cabanillas), aruiz@us.es (Antonio Ruiz-Cortés) Preprint submitted to Information SystemsNovember 22, 2012 reasoners' facilities can be leveraged. These operations provide information that can assist process analysts in the definition and instrumentation of PPIs. Finally, to validate the usefulness of our proposal, we have used the PPINOT metamodel at the core of a software tool called the PPINOT tool suite and we have applied it in several real scenarios.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators

del–Río–Ortega

Resinas

Cabanillas

et al. 2013

Information Systems

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore enterprise architectures enable the company to be represented in a holistic and integrated perspective, to achieve the business objectives and facilitate decision-making [4]. In recent years, a number of enterprise architectures have been proposed, including: CIMOSA [5], GIM-GRAI [6], PERA [7]; GERAM [8], IE-GIP [9,10,11,12,13] ARIS [14] and TOGAF-ADM [15].…”

Section: Inter-enterprise Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Inter-enterprise architecture as a tool to empower decision-making in hierarchical collaborative production planning

Vargas

Boza

Patel

et al. 2016

Data & Knowledge Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The novel idea of inter-enterprise architecture from the enterprise engineering perspective allows collaborative networks to integrate and coordinate different organizations. Therefore, interenterprise architecture offers multiple benefits, including: joint process harmonization, business strategy and information technology alignment, technological cost reduction, risk and redundancies reduction, customer services improvement and enhanced responsiveness. Inter-enterprise architecture can be used to solve the different issues that collaborative networks face on a daily basis. A conceptual model that addresses the problem of unexpected events management in the context of hierarchical production planning to improve decision making in collaborative environments is proposed using of inter-enterprise architecture. The proposed conceptual model comprises of a framework, a modelling language and the methodology. The conceptual model has been applied to a Spanish collaborative network from the ceramic tile sector.

show abstract

“…According to the above classification, the following enterprise architectures are considered a type of TEA: CIMOSA (CIMOSA Association 1996), GIM-GRAI (Chen et al 1997), GERAM (Force, IFIP-IFAC Task 1998), IE-GIP (Ortiz 1998) and its extension that took the same name (Cuenca 2009 …”

Section: Enterprise Engineering and Enterprise Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Towards the development of the framework for inter sensing enterprise architecture

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the main enterprise architectures proposed so far, an EA should be conformed at least for a framework, a methodology and a modelling language. Sensing Enterprise (SE) is a quality of an enterprise or a network that allow it reacting to business stimuli based on the Internet. The advent of these both fields is recent and there is not evidence of the use of IEA to modelling SE, finding an interesting gap to work on. In this sense, this paper proposes an initial Framework for Inter Sensing Enterprise Architecture (FISEA), which seeks classify, organize, store and communicate in a conceptual level the elements for inter sensing enterprise architecture and their relationships, ensuring their consistency and integrity. This FISEA provides a clear picture about the elements and views that make up collaborative network (CN) and their inter-relationships, based on the support of the Internet for its operation.

show abstract

GRAI integrated methodology and its mapping onto generic enterprise reference architecture and methodology

Cited by 91 publications

References 4 publications

On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators

On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators

Inter-enterprise architecture as a tool to empower decision-making in hierarchical collaborative production planning

Towards the development of the framework for inter sensing enterprise architecture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About