|Name of approach||Background||Purpose||Type of work||Worldview||Models||Modeling||Fit|
|Enterprise||KE||I, II, III||I||R||Obj||Yes||No||Lo|
|TOVE||CIM, KE||I, II, III||MI||R||Obj||Yes||No||Lo|
|Metis||SE||I, II, III||MI||R||Obj||Yes||No||Mid|
A few remarks on the use of abbreviations in the table:
Another observation is that most approaches have several purposes (and
they are not internally prioritized). Approaches that seek to fulfill many
purposes necessarily have to be more comprehensive than approaches that
only focus on one purpose.
|The purpose of enterprise modeling in F3 is both I and II. Hence, requirements to F3 must be more comprehensive than requirements to SSM, which only focuses on I.|
"The graphical methods for describing discourses are (1) a discourse graph, and (2) a conversation graph."A method can never be graphical. A method can never be a graph. Languages, on the other hand, can be graphical and presented in form of graphs. Even if the statement is taken out of context and might represent a "slip of tongue", it is representative for an attitude that plagues some (enterprise) modeling communities: A modeling method is considered equivalent to a modeling language. Focus on the modeling process is required when the perspective on enterprise modeling is reality construction.
The observation that models receive considerably more attention than the modeling process is consistent with a claim made by Rolland and Cauvet (1992:1) in their comprehensive survey of trends and perspectives in conceptual modeling (italics added):
"In contrast to the mature level of research on conceptual models, there is an evident lack of understanding and formalization of the conceptual modelling process."Furthermore, even if some approaches do discuss the modeling process, they are in terms of the modeling language and not the professional language of the actors in the domain that is modeled. Terms like objects, relationships, processes, speech acts, etc. are appropriate for representation and manifestation of a domain, but not for sense-making within the domain. The exception is SSM.
The observation that type of work being modeled is dominated by replication risk is also consistent with the observation that most modeling methods focus on representation and manifestation, and not on sense-making. If the domain that is modeled is widely agreed upon, there is little need for sense-making -- the modelers can focus on representation of the domain.
Recognizing that reality associated with Universe of Production is socially constructed calls for development of enterprise modeling approaches that are able to model the construction process in the Universe of Production -- i.e., creating modeling languages that are tailored to represent the construction process and alternative local realities. OOram and SAMPO exemplifies these approaches: OOram is well suited for representation of role models that describe various aspects of objects. SAMPO is well suited for representing communication in the Universe of Production.
However, recognizing that the Universe of Production is socially constructed is not sufficient. The main issue that is advocated in this thesis is that the Universe of Modeling is socially constructed. The immediate consequence of this view is that the modeling process necessarily becomes a construction process. Being able to represent the construction processes in the UoP may be considered important, but the vital requirement is to see the UoM as constructed. SSM is the approach that seems to have recognized this to the fullest extent.
Another reflection is that the Universe of Research is constructed as well. To do research on enterprise modeling is reality construction (and the construction process is social as the researcher makes sense through use of already constructed concepts and theories, and communicate with other researchers through dialogue, scientific conferences and papers). Dahlbom (1992:122) discusses the idea of science as construction briefly. These considerations are revisited in chapter 10 when evaluating the research accomplishment.