度量和管理企业架构(EA)原则对EA模型的设计限制

Diana Marosin, S. Ghanavati
{"title":"度量和管理企业架构(EA)原则对EA模型的设计限制","authors":"Diana Marosin, S. Ghanavati","doi":"10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Implementation and formalisation, alongside with creation, adoption and usage of Enterprise Architecture (EA) principles are hot topics of the current years of EA research. However, the EA community, both academic and professional, misses a consensus on the definitions and use of principles. Furthermore, not much research is done in the direction of measuring the impact (e.g. design restriction) of EA principles. We aim to create a formal framework for measuring and managing this impact manifested by the EA principles on the EA models. Studying the current literature, we noticed there are similarities and differences between EA principles and regulations. The two concepts resemble each other given first, the purpose (both providing a normative guidance on the evolution of the enterprise) and second, the natural language representation and the structural definition (even if most of the time the principles are company specific, they all seem to have common fields in their definition). Principles behave mostly like soft-laws and being non-compliant with them results in fewer penalties and consequences compared to non-compliance with regulations. To that end, we investigate and adapt methods similar to the ones that can be found in requirements engineering for checking and managing regulatory compliance.","PeriodicalId":130029,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring and managing the design restriction of enterprise architecture (EA) principles on EA models\",\"authors\":\"Diana Marosin, S. Ghanavati\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Implementation and formalisation, alongside with creation, adoption and usage of Enterprise Architecture (EA) principles are hot topics of the current years of EA research. However, the EA community, both academic and professional, misses a consensus on the definitions and use of principles. Furthermore, not much research is done in the direction of measuring the impact (e.g. design restriction) of EA principles. We aim to create a formal framework for measuring and managing this impact manifested by the EA principles on the EA models. Studying the current literature, we noticed there are similarities and differences between EA principles and regulations. The two concepts resemble each other given first, the purpose (both providing a normative guidance on the evolution of the enterprise) and second, the natural language representation and the structural definition (even if most of the time the principles are company specific, they all seem to have common fields in their definition). Principles behave mostly like soft-laws and being non-compliant with them results in fewer penalties and consequences compared to non-compliance with regulations. To that end, we investigate and adapt methods similar to the ones that can be found in requirements engineering for checking and managing regulatory compliance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330210\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

摘要

实现和形式化,以及企业架构(EA)原则的创建、采用和使用,是当前EA研究的热门话题。然而,EA社区,无论是学术的还是专业的,都错过了对原则的定义和使用的共识。此外,在衡量EA原则的影响(例如设计限制)的方向上没有进行太多的研究。我们的目标是创建一个正式的框架,用于度量和管理由EA模型上的EA原则所体现的影响。研究当前的文献,我们注意到EA原则和法规之间存在异同。这两个概念彼此相似,首先是目的(都为企业的发展提供规范性指导),其次是自然语言表示和结构定义(即使大多数时候原则是特定于公司的,它们在定义中似乎都有共同的领域)。原则的行为更像是软法律,与不遵守规则相比,不遵守原则会导致更少的惩罚和后果。为了达到这个目的,我们研究并采用了类似于需求工程中用于检查和管理法规遵从性的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Measuring and managing the design restriction of enterprise architecture (EA) principles on EA models
Implementation and formalisation, alongside with creation, adoption and usage of Enterprise Architecture (EA) principles are hot topics of the current years of EA research. However, the EA community, both academic and professional, misses a consensus on the definitions and use of principles. Furthermore, not much research is done in the direction of measuring the impact (e.g. design restriction) of EA principles. We aim to create a formal framework for measuring and managing this impact manifested by the EA principles on the EA models. Studying the current literature, we noticed there are similarities and differences between EA principles and regulations. The two concepts resemble each other given first, the purpose (both providing a normative guidance on the evolution of the enterprise) and second, the natural language representation and the structural definition (even if most of the time the principles are company specific, they all seem to have common fields in their definition). Principles behave mostly like soft-laws and being non-compliant with them results in fewer penalties and consequences compared to non-compliance with regulations. To that end, we investigate and adapt methods similar to the ones that can be found in requirements engineering for checking and managing regulatory compliance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Semantic web representations for reasoning about applicability and satisfiability of federal regulations for information security Towards systems for increased access to justice using goal modeling Structuring diverse regulatory requirements for global product development Measuring and managing the design restriction of enterprise architecture (EA) principles on EA models Terminology matching of requirements specification documents and regulations for compliance checking
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1