David Chen IMS-LAPS University Bordeaux 1, France BARRIERS DRIVEN METHODOLOGY FOR ENTERPRISE INTEROPERABILITY

David Chen

IMS-LAPS

University Bordeaux 1, France

BARRIERS DRIVEN METHODOLOGY FOR ENTERPRISE INTEROPERABILITY

Developing Methodology :motivations & objectives

MotivationsLack of methodological support to implement enterprise interoperability

Existing methodologies are not well adapted to handle interoperability issues

Need to develop a methodology independent from any application and technology

ObjectivesTo define a structured approach in a step by step manner

To allow selecting and composing available interoperability solutions and tools according to identified requirements

To identify and involve various actors of studied enterprise and specialists

To allow measuring the “interoperability degree” between parties

To develop methodology

• Guide the implementation of the interoperability• Avoid hazardous approaches (reduce time and cost to implement)• Capitalize good practices and solutions

Enterprise interoperability

- Interoperability: the ability for two (or more) systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged (IEEE)

Definition Interoperability application domain

Interoperabilityresearch domain

Ex. ERP, SCM, PLM, Virtual enterprise,…

Ex. Concepts, metrics, models, framework

Generic concepts, principles, solutions and methodology

Requirements, experiences, validations

- Enterprise interoperability: the ability of interaction between enterprise systems. It is considered as significant if the interactions can take place at least at the three different levels: data, services and process, with a semantics defined in a given business context (IDEAS)

Basic Concepts

METHODOLOGY

ENABLING T

OOLS

INFRASTRUCTURE

SOLUTIONS

ENTERPRISE A

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

ENTERPRISE B

INTEGRATED

UNIFIED

FEDERATED

APPROACHES

CO

NC

EP

TU

EL

TE

CH

NO

LO

GIC

AL

OR

GA

NIS

AT

ION

AL

BARRIERS

Hypothesis and Research:

- Enterprises are not interoperable because there exist barriers to interoperability- Barriers are incompatibilities of various kinds at the various enterprise levels- Identify common barriers to interoperability and solutions to remove barriers

Interoperability ontology

(Naudet, 2007)

Components of the methodology

Structured procedure Interoperability MeasurementStructured groups/meetings

Definition ofobjectives and needs

Existing systemanalysis

Select and combinesolutions

Implementationand test








Solutions and

existing tools

InteroperabilityFramework

EnterpriseInteroperabilityMaturity Model

(EIMM)

EnterpriseInteroperability

DegreeMeasurement

Structured procedure Interoperability MeasurementStructured groups/meetings












Solutions and

existing tools

InteroperabilityFramework

EnterpriseInteroperabilityMaturity Model

(EIMM)

EnterpriseInteroperability

DegreeMeasurement

Interoperability Framework

Three basic dimensions:

- Interoperability concerns (represent interoperability aspects between two enterprises)

Business, Process, Service, Data.

- Interoperability barriers (represent incompatibilities between two enterprises)

Conceptual (syntax & semantic), Technological (platform & software), Organizational (authority/responsibility & organization).

- Interoperability approaches (represent the ways in which the barriers are removed)

Integrated, Unified, Federated.

Interoperabilitybarriers

Inte

rop

erab

ility

co

nce

rns

Inte

roper

abili

ty

appro

aches

Interoperability knowledge/solution

1. Interoperability concern Process level2. Interoperability barrier Conceptual (Syntax and sematics)3. Interoperability approach Unified approach

4. Interoperability problemdifferent process models use different process languges and are not interoperable

5. Interoperability knowledge

Define a neutral Process Specification Language (PSL) and related ontology as a metamodel to allow mapping between different process models

6. Example (optional)

7. RemarksInitially proposed by NIST, now moved to standardisation at ISO level

8. References

ISO CD 18629 (2001), Industrial automation systems and integration, Process Specification Language (PSL), JW8/ISO 184/SC4/SC5

Interoperability knowledge/solution templateName of the knowledge/solution: PSL

Template description

Interoperability measurement

Company A Company B

concernsCONCEPTUAL TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONAL

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

Company ACONCEPTUAL TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONAL

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

+++

+++

+++

+++ ++

++

++

+ +

-

-

-

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

Company B

concernsIopIop

++++

+-++

-

Maturity model

Interoperabilitycompatibilitymeasurement(EIDM)

Interoperabilityperformancemeasurement(EIDM)

Interoperability potentialMeasurement(EIMM) Compatibility matrix

Performance measures

+++ +++

Critical

WeakNone-

Considerable

EIMM vs EIDM





• Define objectives of Io and performance targeted; evaluate the feasibility and cost; project planning• Define needs of Io in terms of the levels of the enter--prise and approach (integrated, unified, federated)

• Identify actors, applications and systems involved in interoperation• Detect barriers and problems to Io, measure existing Io degree, analyze strong and weak points

• Search and select available Io solution elements using the interoperability framework• Combine and construct a company specific Io solution

• Implement and test the Io solution; perform a performance measure• Training company staff

Structured approach

Structured groups /meetings

Implementation/test

Interviews

Project board

t

Specialist

group

Existing system Analysis Select/combine solutions

(1)Synthesis

group

Project board

Define objectives Guide the study Assess solutions

Interviewees

(provide information)

Group of specialistsTo propose

To analyze & to validate

To provide information

To validate

Synthesis group

Main responsible people of the company

Perform the study and search for solution

Adopted from GRAI methodology

ATHENA A8 Scenario: Carrier-Shipper

Shipper

Sales OrderSales Order

DeliveryDelivery

PickingPicking

PackingPacking

ShipmentShipment

Carrier A

Calculate RateCalculate Rate

Generate RoutingCode

Generate RoutingCode

Generate LabelGenerate Label

Carrier B

Calculate RateCalculate Rate

Generate Routing Code

Generate Routing Code

Generate LabelGenerate Label

Who is responsible?

How is the process configured?

Which applications?

What’s the data structure?

1. Definition of objectives and needs

[Provided by SAP for ATHENA A8]

uses

QuestionnaireEIMM

Conceptual Technological Organizational

Business MPCE

Process BPEL

Services

Data EXPRESS

to obtain

Capability matrix

Existing System Analysis – EIMM & EIDM

Shipper

Existing System AnalysisDetecting barriers

Conceptual Technological

Organizational

Business Proprietary

Process

Services

Data FedEx Xml description

Conceptual Technological

Organizational

Business Proprietary

Process BPEL

Services

Data Express document

+++ +++

Critical

Considerable

WeakNone-

© ATHENA Consortium 2006 4

ATHENA A8 /2006

barriers

levels CONCEPTUAL TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONAL

BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

-

-

-

-

-

+ -

-

-

-

++

+++

FedEx

Shipper

Carrier-Shipper Scenario Barriers

Interoperability knowledge/solutions repository

Template elements Description

Interoperability concerns DataInteroperability barriers Conceptual barrier - Incompatible syntactic and semantic representation

of data at each interacting partnerInteroperability problem Different models adopted by the companies makes data exchange

difficult as enterprises cannot exchange their data automaticallyATHENA solution identified - Conceptual solutions: Annotation of proprietary models according to

common ontology to allow data reconciliation- Technical solutions: A3 tools, WSDL Analyzer

Outcome of ATHENA results evaluation – Relevance to SMEs

- Adoption of the common generic ontology reflecting the business domain

- The WSDL Analyzer detects mismatches between data a service expects and provides

- Relevant for SME which receive required interfaces of big companies which expect that their smaller business partners adapt to their interfaces

Select / Combine solutions

Template: Data exchange barrier


ATHENA A8 /2006

barriers


BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

-

-

-

-

-

+ -

-

-

-

++

+++


ATHENA A8 /2006

barriers


BUSINESS

PROCESS

SERVICE

DATA

-

-

-

-

-

+ -

-

-

-

++

+++

Conclusions

Incompatibility is the fundamental concept used in defining the interoperability domain

Broad sense, not limited to ‘technical’ aspect but also ‘business’, ‘organization’, and concerns all levels of the enterprise

generic characteristic of the interoperability research, regardless of the content of information exchanged between two systems

Generic methodology, structured approach supported by Iop framework and Iop measurements, and Iop knowledge repository

Documents

David Chen IMS-LAPS University Bordeaux 1, France BARRIERS DRIVEN METHODOLOGY FOR ENTERPRISE INTEROPERABILITY