This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Enterprise modelling article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What are the differences? If they are the same thing should we merge the two articles?-- GrWikiMan 16:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the unsubstantiated claim that "the most effective and least time-consuming approach to Enterprise Modelling has proven to be Soft Systems Methodology". There have been some comparative reviews of methodologies, but they rarely produce such one-sided results. -- RichardVeryard 10:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
"Enterprise modelling is the process of improving the enterprise performance through the creation of enterprise models" is a terrible definition. Someone who knows what enterprise modeling is needs to write a better definition. Defining a term using the terms being defined is a bad idea. It doesn't help out people who don't know what "enterprise modelling" is —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
128.205.207.203 (
talk)
07:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, this field is notable but somewhat incoherent, and this page reflects the lack of coherence.
The main problem here is that I can't see how to make the page more coherent without doing the original research needed to make the field itself more coherent. -- RichardVeryard ( talk) 13:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Marcel. I appreciate the efforts you are making to improve this page. But there are still some problems with it, and I can't see how to get around these problems without doing a bit of original research. For example, I think it was you who added a link to Object-Oriented Modeling. Now I am aware of people who claim the relevance of OO modelling to enterprise modelling, but those claims are disputable and possibly even unverifiable. And if we included all the techniques for which people have made similar claims, we'd produce an extremely long list indeed. Meanwhile, the language that is possibly closest to being adopted as a standard for enterprise modelling isn't in there yet. (I guess I'd better add it myself.) -- RichardVeryard ( talk) 13:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following section:
Because I couldn't find a reliable source confirming these statements. -- Mdd ( talk) 21:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I replaced the following text with an introduction about economic modeling
The main problem is that, this text has no references, and no links to other articles. -- Mdd ( talk) 01:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The current article does not make enough emphasis on the modeling of "motivation" in enterprise modeling. In Zachman Framework, this is the entire top row, called "Scope", addressing the goals of the enterprise (the "What"), the means and strategies (the "How"), the organizational structure ("Where"), the roadmap ("When") and the motivation ("Why"). This is important, because this is what constitutes the policy of the enterprise, which then provides input into the system requirements and system design.
Another important aspect of an enterprise is governance. This includes the regulations to which the enterprise has to comply; business rules of the organization and how they support the scope; certification and accreditation issues, assurance, etc.
Enterprise Architecture Framework do cover the "scope" issues.
There are several international standards that are relevant to this area, such as the ITU-T User Requirement Notation (URN), OMG Business Motivation Metamodel (BMM), the upcoming ISO 15026 related to the assurance case, etc.
-- Equilibrioception ( talk) 02:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I like to get this article more focussed, and differences with inter-related pages clearified, sucha as business process modeling, enterprise engineering, enterprise architecture and enterprise architecture framework. The article could use improvement in every section:
I also think this article needs an other first (introduction) image.
-- Mdd ( talk) 23:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
-- Mdd ( talk) 20:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Source: John Fraser and Austin Tate (1995). The Enterprise Tool Set: An Open Enterprise Architecture. AIAI, University of Edinburgh.
-- Mdd ( talk) 14:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Source: Terje Totland Enterprise Modeling as a Means to Support Human Sense-making and Communication in Organizations. Dr. ing. dissertation Norwegian University of Science and Technology at idi.ntnu.no, August 29, 1997 ( content online)
In Ch 5. Contemporary Approaches to Enterprise Modeling ( online) Totland gave a similar listing of contemporary approaches to Enterprise Modeling. He mentioned:
As in the above listing not all of those approaches classify as enterprise modeling approaches. -- Mdd ( talk) 22:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Ted Williams (2000) on http://www.pera.net/ (Last updated August 18, 2000) gave an interesting listing Enterprise Models and Methodologies. He claimed it is "difficult to distinguish between Models that have associated Methodologies, and Methodologies which are based on a conceptual model".
Now this is a rather contrast with the current listing of Enterprise modelling techniques:
And this seems worth examing. At first site several initiatives mentioned by Williams don't classify here as enterprise modelling, such as:
-- Mdd ( talk) 15:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Source: Henk Jonkers (eds) State of the Art in Architecture Concepts and Description; ArchiMate Deliverable D2.1. Telematica Instituut (TI) & Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS)
Jonkers et al (2002) has focussed on "Architectural frameworks and standards", "Organisation and process modelling languages" and 'Application and technology modelling languages", and described:
-- Mdd ( talk) 22:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
sorry ,awkward English.
Enterprise modelling#Enterprise model in line 2
'Thomas Naylor (1970)' and Reference#13 'Naylor, T. (1970)' equal Thomas Naylor ok?-- 翼のない堕天使 ( talk) 00:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
The diagram accompanying the article is very generic and somewhat specific to information technology. It would be good to use a diagram that illustrates an actual enterprise. Please consider this a suggestion to improve the article (which is pretty good). Nickmalik ( talk) 21:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
There are a few things that need addressing, mainly to do with citing and some tidy-ups of particular paragraphs. I'll be looking to address these during this week. — Sasuke Sarutobi ( talk) 13:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Enterprise modelling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Enterprise modelling article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What are the differences? If they are the same thing should we merge the two articles?-- GrWikiMan 16:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the unsubstantiated claim that "the most effective and least time-consuming approach to Enterprise Modelling has proven to be Soft Systems Methodology". There have been some comparative reviews of methodologies, but they rarely produce such one-sided results. -- RichardVeryard 10:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
"Enterprise modelling is the process of improving the enterprise performance through the creation of enterprise models" is a terrible definition. Someone who knows what enterprise modeling is needs to write a better definition. Defining a term using the terms being defined is a bad idea. It doesn't help out people who don't know what "enterprise modelling" is —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
128.205.207.203 (
talk)
07:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, this field is notable but somewhat incoherent, and this page reflects the lack of coherence.
The main problem here is that I can't see how to make the page more coherent without doing the original research needed to make the field itself more coherent. -- RichardVeryard ( talk) 13:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Marcel. I appreciate the efforts you are making to improve this page. But there are still some problems with it, and I can't see how to get around these problems without doing a bit of original research. For example, I think it was you who added a link to Object-Oriented Modeling. Now I am aware of people who claim the relevance of OO modelling to enterprise modelling, but those claims are disputable and possibly even unverifiable. And if we included all the techniques for which people have made similar claims, we'd produce an extremely long list indeed. Meanwhile, the language that is possibly closest to being adopted as a standard for enterprise modelling isn't in there yet. (I guess I'd better add it myself.) -- RichardVeryard ( talk) 13:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following section:
Because I couldn't find a reliable source confirming these statements. -- Mdd ( talk) 21:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I replaced the following text with an introduction about economic modeling
The main problem is that, this text has no references, and no links to other articles. -- Mdd ( talk) 01:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The current article does not make enough emphasis on the modeling of "motivation" in enterprise modeling. In Zachman Framework, this is the entire top row, called "Scope", addressing the goals of the enterprise (the "What"), the means and strategies (the "How"), the organizational structure ("Where"), the roadmap ("When") and the motivation ("Why"). This is important, because this is what constitutes the policy of the enterprise, which then provides input into the system requirements and system design.
Another important aspect of an enterprise is governance. This includes the regulations to which the enterprise has to comply; business rules of the organization and how they support the scope; certification and accreditation issues, assurance, etc.
Enterprise Architecture Framework do cover the "scope" issues.
There are several international standards that are relevant to this area, such as the ITU-T User Requirement Notation (URN), OMG Business Motivation Metamodel (BMM), the upcoming ISO 15026 related to the assurance case, etc.
-- Equilibrioception ( talk) 02:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I like to get this article more focussed, and differences with inter-related pages clearified, sucha as business process modeling, enterprise engineering, enterprise architecture and enterprise architecture framework. The article could use improvement in every section:
I also think this article needs an other first (introduction) image.
-- Mdd ( talk) 23:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
-- Mdd ( talk) 20:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Source: John Fraser and Austin Tate (1995). The Enterprise Tool Set: An Open Enterprise Architecture. AIAI, University of Edinburgh.
-- Mdd ( talk) 14:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Source: Terje Totland Enterprise Modeling as a Means to Support Human Sense-making and Communication in Organizations. Dr. ing. dissertation Norwegian University of Science and Technology at idi.ntnu.no, August 29, 1997 ( content online)
In Ch 5. Contemporary Approaches to Enterprise Modeling ( online) Totland gave a similar listing of contemporary approaches to Enterprise Modeling. He mentioned:
As in the above listing not all of those approaches classify as enterprise modeling approaches. -- Mdd ( talk) 22:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Ted Williams (2000) on http://www.pera.net/ (Last updated August 18, 2000) gave an interesting listing Enterprise Models and Methodologies. He claimed it is "difficult to distinguish between Models that have associated Methodologies, and Methodologies which are based on a conceptual model".
Now this is a rather contrast with the current listing of Enterprise modelling techniques:
And this seems worth examing. At first site several initiatives mentioned by Williams don't classify here as enterprise modelling, such as:
-- Mdd ( talk) 15:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Source: Henk Jonkers (eds) State of the Art in Architecture Concepts and Description; ArchiMate Deliverable D2.1. Telematica Instituut (TI) & Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS)
Jonkers et al (2002) has focussed on "Architectural frameworks and standards", "Organisation and process modelling languages" and 'Application and technology modelling languages", and described:
-- Mdd ( talk) 22:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
sorry ,awkward English.
Enterprise modelling#Enterprise model in line 2
'Thomas Naylor (1970)' and Reference#13 'Naylor, T. (1970)' equal Thomas Naylor ok?-- 翼のない堕天使 ( talk) 00:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
The diagram accompanying the article is very generic and somewhat specific to information technology. It would be good to use a diagram that illustrates an actual enterprise. Please consider this a suggestion to improve the article (which is pretty good). Nickmalik ( talk) 21:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
There are a few things that need addressing, mainly to do with citing and some tidy-ups of particular paragraphs. I'll be looking to address these during this week. — Sasuke Sarutobi ( talk) 13:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Enterprise modelling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)