Consolidating service enginering perspectives

Yustianto, Purnomo; Suhardi, .; Doss, Robin

doi:10.1109/icitsi.2015.7437743

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper introduces an ontological basis for 'Service Engineering' [19] by describing a process of ontology building of a series of ontologies; service-oriented architecture ontology, general service ontology, and software-service ontology. Two final sets of ontologies were produced: general service ontology ( Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidating Service Engineering Ontologies : Building Service Ontology from SOA Modeling Language (SoaML)

Yustianto

Doss

Suhardi

et al. 2018

2018 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a term for characterizing a process of devising a service system, the term 'service engineering' is still regarded as an 'open' research challenge due to unspecified details and conflicting perspectives. This paper presents consolidated service engineering ontologies in collecting, specifying and defining relationship between components pertinent within the context of service engineering. The ontologies are built by way of literature surveys from the collected conceptual works by collating various concepts into an integrated ontology. Two ontologies are produced: general service ontology and software service ontology. The software-service ontology is drawn from the informatics domain, while the generalized ontology of a service system is built from both a business management and the information system perspective. The produced ontologies are verified by exercising conceptual operationalizations of the ontologies in adopting several service orientation features and service system patterns. The proposed ontologies are demonstrated to be sufficient to serve as a basis for a service engineering framework.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidating Service Engineering Ontologies : Building Service Ontology from SOA Modeling Language (SoaML)

Yustianto

Doss

Suhardi

et al. 2018

2018 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In pursuing these initiatives, the existence of a structured collection of relevant modelling languages, or metamodel, is a necessity. This paper is an attempt to produce such a set, particularly in formalizing a service engineering process (Yustianto et al, 2015;Suhardi et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A unifying structure of metamodel landscape

Yustianto

Doss

Suhardi

2019

Jnl of Modelling in Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The modelling landscape experiences a rich proliferation of modelling language, or metamodel.The emergence of cross-disciplinary disciplines, such as enterprise engineering and service engineering, necessitates a multi-perspective approach to traverse the component from strategic level to technological aspect. This paper aims to find a unifying structure of metamodels introduced by academics and industries.Design/methodology/approach -A grounded approach is taken to define the structure by collating the metamodels to form an emerging structure. Metamodels were collected from a literature survey from several interrelated disciplines: software engineering, system engineering, enterprise architecture, service engineering, business process management and financial accounting.Findings -The result suggests seven stereotypes of metamodel, characterized by its label: goal, enterprise, business model, service, process, software and system. The aspect of "process" holds a central role in connecting all other aspect in the modelling continuum. Service engineering can be viewed as an alternative abstraction of enterprise engineering in containing the concepts of "business model", "capability", "value", "interaction", "process" and "software".Research limitations/implications -Metamodel collection was performed to emphasize on representativeness rather than comprehensiveness, in which old and unpopular metamodel were disregarded unless it offer unique characteristic not yet represented in the collection. Owing to its bottom-up approach, the paper is not intended to identify a gap in metamodel offering.Originality/value -This paper produces a structure of metamodel landscape in a graphical format to illustrate correlation between metamodels in which evolutive patterns of metamodel proliferation can be observed. The produced structure can serve as map in metamodel continuum.

show abstract

“…A service engineering methodology in general emphasizes the SOA approach to design IT services that support the business services. Some popular SOA based service engineering methodologies, i.e., SOMA, SOAF, MSOAM, and SOAD [21], [29] focus solely on IT services design based on the given business services needs [25] [17]. The methodologies commonly shield the design of individual IT services without considering the characteristic of systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Services Computing Systems Engineering Framework using An Acceptance Model

Kurniawan¹,

Suhardi²,

Bandung³

et al. 2019

Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gap between business services and IT services becomes a major concern in services computing. As an approach for service-based IT solution, services computing systems are promised to be able to bridge the gap between these services. The implementation will require an engineering framework as a guide to building the systems. The framework needs to be evaluated to provide important feedback to the framework development. This paper outlines the evaluation of SCSE framework through an acceptance model. The study develops an acceptance model based on the experiences of a group of engineers after using the framework to build smart campus services systems. A survey involving 54 systems engineers with various engineering backgrounds was conducted to assess the experiences of the engineers in using the framework. The results of the acceptance model show that both perceived ease of use, represented by the level of agreement (υ1) and perceived usefulness, represented by the level of importance (υ2) deliver good results almost for the entire stages of the proposed framework. In addition, the user experiences of using the proposed framework are in the acceptable levels. The contribution of this paper is an enrichment of the engineering methodologies for the service-oriented system from the perspective of services computing.

show abstract

Consolidating service enginering perspectives

Cited by 9 publications

References 20 publications

Consolidating Service Engineering Ontologies : Building Service Ontology from SOA Modeling Language (SoaML)

Consolidating Service Engineering Ontologies : Building Service Ontology from SOA Modeling Language (SoaML)

A unifying structure of metamodel landscape

Evaluating Services Computing Systems Engineering Framework using An Acceptance Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About