Towards a Unified Business Strategy Language: a Meta-model of Strategy Maps

1,679 views
1,604 views

Published on

paper presented at PoEM 2010

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,679
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
45
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Within systems development, (GORE) and (BMM) aim at linking stakeholders with artifacts.
    The artifact should serve the purpose envisioned by stakeholders.
    This relation is also addressed on a larger scale within IT alignment, where a system is implemented according to an IT strategy.
    However, IT strategy is only a part of an Enterprise’s strategic alignment (Henderson & Venkatraman 1993).
    Considering an enterprise comprising of a large set and subsets of stakeholders, alignment applies to business strategy covers every hierarchical organizational level, or perspective, both top-down and bottom-up.
  • A strategy map is a representation of the four organizational perspectives of
    the Balance Scorecard framework (BSC) which presents an organization’s business activities through a number of measures typically from four organizational perspectives: financial, customer, internal, learning and growth,
    A SC presents an organization’s business activities through a number of measures typically from the four perspectives, which makes it balanced (BSC) since it covers internar and external and for the four perspectives that cover all business activities
    the time aspect covered in a bottom up manner suggesting that what lies on the bottom is the outcome of planning at the top and has taken place in the past.
    WHY?
    Facilitates in communicating direction and priorities across the enterprise, thus
    creating enterprise alignment.
  • • Strategy balances long-term financial commitments aiming at profitable revenue
    growth and short-term financial commitments aiming at cost reductions and
    productivity improvements.
    • Strategy is based on differentiated and clearly articulated customer value
    proposition.
    • Value is created through focused, effective and aligned internal business processes
    grouped into four clusters: operations management, customer management,
    innovation and regulatory and social.
    • Strategy consists of simultaneous, complementary themes highlighting the most
    critical processes supporting the customer value proposition.
    • Strategic alignment determines the value and role of intangible assets: human,
    information, organization.
    TO-BE vs AS-IS
    Strategy to be achieved vs Analyzing the current status of achievement
    TO-BE
    Develop a new strategy (top-down), striving for completeness as the BSC need to be complete (all four perspectives, else imbalanced)
    Completeness is essential
    AS-IS
    Analysis of current strategy migrating into strategy maps, identify missing goals, processes, assets (they can be incomplete in their intermediate state)
  • The Strategy Maps class: “As-is” implies the possibility that the map is in an incomplete state.
    “To-be” refers to a map representing a strategy for the future of the company, must be
    Complete, for BSC “balance” requires completeness.
    The distinction is made through the type attribute to distinguish between strategy
    maps built for analysis and strategy maps built for strategy.
    Constraints:
    4 predefined perspectives
    If to-be must be complete: no group or subggroup may exist without goal
    The Goal class: For the internal perspective, as well as the learning and growth perspective, both processes and capital appear in a strategy map in the form of goals.
    A process is executed to satisfy a goal [18]
    goals are set for all groups of capital referring to particular assets aiming at desired competencies, capabilities needed
    Constraints:
    every goal included in a theme, also included in the SM for which the them is defined
    The Causality-relation class: cause-effect relation between goals within
    a strategy map and results into a tree structure of goals that when completed link goals
    on all perspectives.
    Constraints:
    it links two goals included in the same strategy
    The Group class: any grouping and any categorization of goals included in a
    strategy map (e.g. internal process clusters, capital, etc.) and holds two attributes, a
    name and a Boolean declaring whether the group is predefined (all groupings coming
    from the strategy map template are acknowledged as predefined). custom groupings can be introduced
    Sub-groups making the nesting of groups inside other groups a tree. For example, “Operations Management Process” shown on
    the template is a sub-group of the “Internal Perspective” group.
    Constraints:
    Perspective: cannot be a subgroup of another group
    not perspective: must be a subgroup of a group
    not predefined: must be included in at least one strategy map (new group types must be used in a strategy map)
    If to-be must be complete: no group or subggroup may exist without goal
    The Perspective class refers: to the highest level of grouping within a strategy map
    and is related to the Group class through generalization. Every strategy map includes
    the four predefined perspectives stated earlier.
    The Theme class refers to the strategic theme(s) chosen within a strategy map. A
    strategic theme is a vertical slice within a strategy map that consists of a specific set
    of interrelated objectives. The vertical slice is then extended to all perspectives and their
    related goals are identified through the cause-effect relation.
  • Towards a Unified Business Strategy Language: a Meta-model of Strategy Maps

    1. 1. Towards a Unified Business Strategy Language: A Meta-model of Strategy Maps Constantinos Giannoulis Michael Petit Jelena Zdravkovic
    2. 2. Agenda  Research scope  Strategy maps  The Strategy Map Meta-model  Future work
    3. 3. Research Scope  Goal modeling: linking stakeholders with artifacts  The holy grail?: An artifact should serve the purpose envisioned by stakeholders!  System Development: GORE [1], BMM [2]  IT alignment, IT Strategy  Enterprise’s strategic alignment , Business Strategy?
    4. 4. Research Scope Current efforts  Combinations of languages to align strategy and value proposition to related operational processes  Examples: INSTAL, business modeling with UML, CREWS- L’Ecritoire, e3-value, 3g framework, i* & RAD, goal modeling and value modeling ontology, i* and strategy maps [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Shortcomings  Operationally focused  Lack goal traceability  No clear link between value creation and system goals  No support on different stakeholder view integration and evaluation  Lack of requirement to strategy traceability  Method specific
    5. 5. Research Scope
    6. 6. Background Goal modeling languages  In RE [11]:  various levels of applicability (e.g. the RE process)  semi-formal vs formal  In business  business model & business plan expressiveness (BMM)  goal oriented enterprise (Popova & Sharpanskykh) [12] Business Strategy [13]  The resource-based view  The industrial organization perspective  The Schumpeterian view of competition
    7. 7. Background  Inspired by the Unified Enterprise Modeling Language, UEML[14]:  We aim at a core language for modeling business strategy aligning business strategy to system requirements  We intend to analyze and evaluate goal-oriented languages against a well defined ontological base  Our ontological base: a unified business strategy meta-model (business strategy concepts and frameworks)
    8. 8. Strategy Maps
    9. 9. Strategy Maps  Strategy Maps (what?)  Four organizational perspectives of the Balance Scorecard framework (BSC): financial, customer, internal, learning and growth  Both external & internal (all business activities)  Structure: Cause-effect links/assumptions  Build top-down (causality is bottom-up)  Communicate direction and priorities  Strategy Maps (why?) [15]  A mediator between Mission, core values, Vision and Strategy to the concrete operational actions  Provides a visual representation
    10. 10. Strategy Maps  The template [15]
    11. 11. The Strategy Map Meta-model  Modeling Strategy Maps  the Strategy Map template provides the main concepts  Applications from literature provide conceptual variations emboddied through constrains  Cardinality restrictions between classes both from the template and literature
    12. 12. The Strategy Map Meta-model  The Strategy Map Meta-model
    13. 13. The Strategy Map Meta-model  Includes all elements of Strategy Maps  Supports utilization scenarios:  As-is  To-be  Generalizes some elements for applicability (Groups)  Introduces explicitely user defined groups and perspetives  Separates classes and instances (application)
    14. 14. Future Work  Extend the meta-model using BSC  Provide a richer semantic basis and enrich it with concepts from other approaches representing busines strategies  Start evaluating how goal modeling languages (i*, KAOS, BMM, etc.) can express business strategy using this meta-model
    15. 15. References  [1] van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: 5th IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 249– 262. IEEE Press, New York (2001)  [2] Business Rules Group (BRG): The Business Motivation Model. Group (2007)  [3] Bleistein, S.J., Cox, K., Verner, J.: Validating strategic alignment of organizational IT requirements using goal modeling and problem diagrams. J. Systems and Software 79, 362–378 (2006)  [4] Thevenet, L.H., Salinesi, C.: Aligning IS to organization’s strategy: the INSTAL method. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 203–217. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)  [5] Nurcan, S., Etien, A., Kaabi, R., Zoukar, I., Rolland, C.: A strategy driven business process modelling approach. J. Business Process Management 11, 628– 649 (2005)  [6] Gordijn, J., Petit, M., Wieringa, R.: Understanding business strategies of networked value constellations using goal- and value modeling. In: 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2006), pp. 129–138 (2006)  [7] van der Raadt, B., Gordijn, J., Yu, E.: Exploring web services ideas from a business value perspective. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2005), pp. 53–62. IEEE CS, Los Alamitos (2005)  [8] Edirisuriya, A.: Design Support for e-Commerce Information Systems using Goal, Business and Process Modelling. PhD Thesis. Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (2009)  [9] Singh, S.N., Woo, C.: Investigating business-IT alignment through multi-disciplinary goal concepts. J. Requirements Engineering 14, 177–207 (2009)  [10] Babar, A., Zowghi, D., Chew, E.: Using Goals to Model Strategy Map for Business IT Alignment. In: 5th International Workshop on Business/IT Alignment and Interoperability (BUSITAL 2010), pp. 16–30 (2010)  [11] Kavakli, E., Loucopoulos, P.: Goal Driven Requirements Engineering: Evaluation of Current Methods. In: 8th CAiSE/IFIP8.1 Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design, EMMSAD (2003)  [12] Popova, V., Sharpanskykh, A.: Formal Modelling of Goals in Organizations. Technical report, VU University faculty of Science (2008)  [13] Barney, J.: Types of Competition and the Theory of Strategy: Toward an Integrative Framework. J. Academy of Management Review 11, 791–800 (1986)  [14] Anaya, V., Berio, G., Harzallah, M., Heymans, P., Matulevicius, R., Opdahl, A., Panetto, H., Verdecho, M.J.: The Unified Enterprise Modelling Language – Overview and further work. J. Computers in Industry 61 (2009)  [15] Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2004)
    16. 16. Questions?  Constantinos Giannoulis  constantinos@dsv.su.se  http://syslab.dsv.su.se/profile/constantinos  Michael Petit  mpe@info.fundp.ac.be  http://www.fundp.ac.be/universite/personnes/page_view/01 002983/  Jelena Zdravkovic  jelenaz@dsv.su.se  http://syslab.dsv.su.se/profile/jelenaz

    ×