{"title":"Including business strategy in model-driven methods: an experiment.","authors":"Rene Noel, Jose Ignacio Panach, Oscar Pastor","doi":"10.1007/s00766-023-00400-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Software-centric organisations design a loosely coupled organisation structure around strategic objectives, replicating this design to their business processes and information systems. Nowadays, dealing with business strategy in a model-driven development context is a challenge since key concepts such as the organisation's structure and strategic ends and means have been mostly addressed at the enterprise architecture level for the strategic alignment of the whole organisation, and have not been included into MDD methods as a requirements source. To overcome this issue, researchers have designed the LiteStrat, a business strategy modelling method compliant with MDD for developing information systems. This article presents an empirical comparison of LiteStrat and with i*, one of the most used models for strategic alignment in an MDD context. The article contributes with a literature review on the experimental comparison of modelling languages, the design of a study for measuring and comparing the semantic quality of modelling languages, and empirical evidence of the LiteStrat and i* differences. The evaluation consists of a 2 × 2 factorial experiment recruiting 28 undergraduate subjects. Significant differences favouring LiteStrat were found for models' accuracy and completeness, while no differences in modeller's efficiency and satisfaction were detected. These results yield evidence of the suitability of LiteStrat for business strategy modelling in a model-driven context.</p>","PeriodicalId":20912,"journal":{"name":"Requirements Engineering","volume":" ","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9999337/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Requirements Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-023-00400-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Software-centric organisations design a loosely coupled organisation structure around strategic objectives, replicating this design to their business processes and information systems. Nowadays, dealing with business strategy in a model-driven development context is a challenge since key concepts such as the organisation's structure and strategic ends and means have been mostly addressed at the enterprise architecture level for the strategic alignment of the whole organisation, and have not been included into MDD methods as a requirements source. To overcome this issue, researchers have designed the LiteStrat, a business strategy modelling method compliant with MDD for developing information systems. This article presents an empirical comparison of LiteStrat and with i*, one of the most used models for strategic alignment in an MDD context. The article contributes with a literature review on the experimental comparison of modelling languages, the design of a study for measuring and comparing the semantic quality of modelling languages, and empirical evidence of the LiteStrat and i* differences. The evaluation consists of a 2 × 2 factorial experiment recruiting 28 undergraduate subjects. Significant differences favouring LiteStrat were found for models' accuracy and completeness, while no differences in modeller's efficiency and satisfaction were detected. These results yield evidence of the suitability of LiteStrat for business strategy modelling in a model-driven context.
期刊介绍:
The journal provides a focus for the dissemination of new results about the elicitation, representation and validation of requirements of software intensive information systems or applications. Theoretical and applied submissions are welcome, but all papers must explicitly address:
-the practical consequences of the ideas for the design of complex systems
-how the ideas should be evaluated by the reflective practitioner
The journal is motivated by a multi-disciplinary view that considers requirements not only in terms of software components specification but also in terms of activities for their elicitation, representation and agreement, carried out within an organisational and social context. To this end, contributions are sought from fields such as software engineering, information systems, occupational sociology, cognitive and organisational psychology, human-computer interaction, computer-supported cooperative work, linguistics and philosophy for work addressing specifically requirements engineering issues.