CA2075315A1 - Integrated process modelling system with group decision support subsystem as input, modelling application development subsystem, and bridge subsystem therebetween - Google Patents
Integrated process modelling system with group decision support subsystem as input, modelling application development subsystem, and bridge subsystem therebetweenInfo
- Publication number
- CA2075315A1 CA2075315A1 CA 2075315 CA2075315A CA2075315A1 CA 2075315 A1 CA2075315 A1 CA 2075315A1 CA 2075315 CA2075315 CA 2075315 CA 2075315 A CA2075315 A CA 2075315A CA 2075315 A1 CA2075315 A1 CA 2075315A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- subsystem
- modelling
- user interface
- application development
- bridge
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Disclosed is an integrated system for creating a process model. The integrated system includes three subsystems, a process defining and modelling user interface subsystem, a CASE process modelling subsystem, and a bridge subsystem. The user interface subsystem is used for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. The bridge sub-system converts the output of the user interface subsystem to compatible input of the process application subsystem.
Disclosed is an integrated system for creating a process model. The integrated system includes three subsystems, a process defining and modelling user interface subsystem, a CASE process modelling subsystem, and a bridge subsystem. The user interface subsystem is used for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. The bridge sub-system converts the output of the user interface subsystem to compatible input of the process application subsystem.
Description
EN9--91-138 ~ 7 INTEG~ATFD PROCE5S MODET,LING
SYSTEM WITH GROUP DECISION SUPPORT
SUBSYSTF.~ AS INPUT, MODE:I.I.ING APPI.ICATION
DEVELOPMENT SUB';YSTEM, ANn BRIDGE ~UBSYSTEM THEREBETWEEN
FIEI~ OF TH~ INVENTION
The invention, while not necessarily being so limited, relates generally -to process modelling and the development of process model software. More specifically, -the invention relates to the use of group decision support systems (such as IDEF0, Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing Definition Level Zero) to define the process, and the integration of the group decision support process definition into the process modelling computer assisted software engineering environment through a bridge linking -the process definition group decision support system and the process modelling computer assisted software engineering environment.
BACKGROUND OF l~ INVENTION
The applications of expert sys-tems, high order languages, computer aided manufacturing, and computer integrated manufacturing to bus;ness and industry are growing rapidly. These applications allow intense utilization of enterprise specific app]ication software, such as data base management systems, computer assisted manufacturing systems, computer integrated manufacturing systems, and the like. However, the development of enterprise specific application software is a complex multi-step process, utilizing a sequence of software tools, with intensive information science professional intervention and end-user feedback between the software tools.
Process modelling, i.e., business process modelling or manufacturing process modelling, is the first step in developing enterprise speciflc application software.
E.N9-91-138 ~ 2 ~ 7 5 3 ~ ~
Central to the effective Ut: i lization of more complex CASE tools for the creation of enterprise software are modelling tools for developing accurate descrip-tions of the underlying manufacturing and business processes. The accurate descriptions of business and manufacturing processes are the OUtp~ltS of mode]]ing tools. These outputs are the inputs -to more sophist:icated CASE tools for the creation of computer aided manufacturing, computer integrated manufac-turing~ and data base management applications, among o-thers~ used for -the management and control of enterprise processes. i.e.~ husiness processes and manufacturing processes.
The modelling process is a multi-step process in which data is collected from the process users, i.e., the end users. This data is analyzed and synthesized into a model of the process. This process model is then translated and used as an input to a sequence to prepare an enterprise specific application, for example, a computer integrated manufacturing application or a computer assisted manufacturing application. One StlCh mode]ling tool used to collect and order the data is IDE~O. One IDEFO package is SofTech Inc. s "SADT"'M Structllred Analysis and Design Technique.
IDEFO is used to produce a function model. This function model is a struct-lred representation of the functions of a system or environment, e.g., a business or manufacturing system or environment, and of the information and objects which interrelate these functions. The model consists of diagrams, text~ and glossary, all cross-referenced to each other. IDEFO is the functional methodology or tool for analyzing the architecture of a system, for the purpose of improving the measurements of the system.
A group of IDEFO models form an "architecture." In an "architecture" the systems environment being modeled is comprised of many componen-t subsys-tems, organizations, and/or technologies. These subsystems, organizations, and/or technologies must work together to accomplish the system ~0~3~
EN9-91-138 ~
objective. The "archi-tecture" is ~ hlueprint, framework, or template that defines~ usually yraphica]ly, the fundamental relationships of -the system. These fundamental rela-tionships include, by way of exemplification and not limitation, (i) functional interfaces. (ii) common~ shared, and discrete information, including information flows, and (iii) dynamic interaction of resources.
IDEFO builds from "box and arrow" graphics of individual cells. A typical cell is shown in FIGURE 4, "Prior Art." The arrows represent interfaces, such as inputs, cons-traints,'controls~ constrain-ts?~ and outputs.
Particularly to be no-ted is -the structure of a cell.
Controls and constraints enter -the top of the box, the materials or information acted UpOIl enters the left side of the box, and the output leaves the right side of the box..
The mechanism which operates on the box~ that is, the person or the automated effector, enters -through the bottom of the box.
The function of the box is anything that can be described by an active verb, as "tighten," "attach,"
"measure," "assemble," "transcribe~" "evaluate," "classify,"
"construct," "solve," "adapt~" "resolve," "develop,"
"compare," "rank," "order." or the like. The arrows that connect to a box represent objects or information needed by the box to perform its function~ as "da-ta." The "input" is something that is to be worked on by the "function." The "output" is the result of the work done by the "function."
The "control" is the set of conditions and circumstances that govern or control the "function." The "mechanism" is the effector that carries out the function. A "mechanism"
may be a person, a computer, a we]der, or a machine tool.
An IDEFO model starts by representing the entire system as a simple unit~ e.g., a box, with arrow interfaces to the outside world. This single box is then detailed on another diagram. In this second level diagram major boxes, representing major sub-systems, are connec-ted by arrows.
These individual boxes represent major subdivisions, subfunctions, or modules of the single parent module. This ~7~3~
decomposition process has decompc)sed -the single parent into a complete set of subsys-tems, each represented by a box whose boundaries are deflned and connec-ted by the interface arrows. Each of the subsys-tems may be further decomposed.
One aspect of the hierarchica] nature of IDEFO is that each box or cell is composed of a fini-te number of boxes or cells. This number is typically from three to six. The purpose of the upper limitation of six subcells is to force the use of a hierarchy to describe complex functions. The purpose of a minimum ]ower limit of three subcells is to force enough detail into the ]evel to make decomposition or resolution of interest.
The output of the IDEFO process is utilized, after processing by a trained Information Science or Systems Science professional, as the input to an application development system. This application development system may be a more computer compatible model for further downstream processing, or it may be the enterprise software product, for example, a computer assisted manufacturing application, a computer integrated manufacturing application, or a data base management or -transaction management application.
Typically, the application developmen-t system is a Computer aided software engineering (CASE) application.
Computer aided software engineering (CASE) is a powerful software development tool tha-t is useful in process modelling and in application development. As both a software development tool and as a process modelling tool, it has the potential of reducing backlogs and maintenance. However, as pointed out by Chang-Yang Lin and Chen-Hua Chung, in "End-User Computing In A CASE Environment,"
J.Info.Syst.Manage., Vol.8, No. 2 pp. 17-21 (1991), CASE
tools are still used primarily by information science professionals, rather then by end-users.
This is a serious shortcoming of CASE tools, because as new conditions and opportuni-ties arise, the end-users are the best judges of end-user needs and ways of doing business. This is especially true in the situation where 3 ~ ~
the end-user input is a subjective and qualitative description of an enterprise process, requiring a sequence of separate and distinc-t steps -to yield the final product.
Each of these separate and distinct steps may require significant Information Science and/or Sys-tems Science professional invo]vement, with fur-ther isolation and distance from the end user. CASE -tools can not reach their full potential without significant end-user involvement.
In this regard, Lin and Chung posi-t that CASE i5 a form of Group Decision Support System (GDSS), in -that end-users can participate in the CASE process. However, end-user participation in the CASE process and environment requires structuring the CASE environment to support end-user applications development. And, in the situation where the original end-user input is a process description that must be modelled, significant restructuritlg of the modelling and CASE environments is required.
CASE is an environment of integrated tools that automate the systems development process. Ultimately, Lin and Chung argue that CASE should be able to capture requirements in natural English statements and automatically generate systems that meet these requiremen-ts. However, they point out that this is not an easily attainable goal. This is because CASE tools only automate limited portions of the software life cycles, i.e., code generators and diagramming tools.
In this regard, the CASE environment can be regarded as a set of software tools that provide some degree of automation to one or more phases of the system life cycle, e.g., code generation. CASE accomplishes -this through a central repository, rules, reusab]e software, and tools that support process modelling and systems development.
Exemplary systems development tools include, solely by way of exemplification and not limitation include:
1. Diagramming tools for analysis and design of an enterprise s da-ta, activities, and interac-tions.
~7~5 EN9-9l--138 6 2. Dictionary -tools for recording. maintaini.ng, and reporting sys-tem de-tails.
SYSTEM WITH GROUP DECISION SUPPORT
SUBSYSTF.~ AS INPUT, MODE:I.I.ING APPI.ICATION
DEVELOPMENT SUB';YSTEM, ANn BRIDGE ~UBSYSTEM THEREBETWEEN
FIEI~ OF TH~ INVENTION
The invention, while not necessarily being so limited, relates generally -to process modelling and the development of process model software. More specifically, -the invention relates to the use of group decision support systems (such as IDEF0, Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing Definition Level Zero) to define the process, and the integration of the group decision support process definition into the process modelling computer assisted software engineering environment through a bridge linking -the process definition group decision support system and the process modelling computer assisted software engineering environment.
BACKGROUND OF l~ INVENTION
The applications of expert sys-tems, high order languages, computer aided manufacturing, and computer integrated manufacturing to bus;ness and industry are growing rapidly. These applications allow intense utilization of enterprise specific app]ication software, such as data base management systems, computer assisted manufacturing systems, computer integrated manufacturing systems, and the like. However, the development of enterprise specific application software is a complex multi-step process, utilizing a sequence of software tools, with intensive information science professional intervention and end-user feedback between the software tools.
Process modelling, i.e., business process modelling or manufacturing process modelling, is the first step in developing enterprise speciflc application software.
E.N9-91-138 ~ 2 ~ 7 5 3 ~ ~
Central to the effective Ut: i lization of more complex CASE tools for the creation of enterprise software are modelling tools for developing accurate descrip-tions of the underlying manufacturing and business processes. The accurate descriptions of business and manufacturing processes are the OUtp~ltS of mode]]ing tools. These outputs are the inputs -to more sophist:icated CASE tools for the creation of computer aided manufacturing, computer integrated manufac-turing~ and data base management applications, among o-thers~ used for -the management and control of enterprise processes. i.e.~ husiness processes and manufacturing processes.
The modelling process is a multi-step process in which data is collected from the process users, i.e., the end users. This data is analyzed and synthesized into a model of the process. This process model is then translated and used as an input to a sequence to prepare an enterprise specific application, for example, a computer integrated manufacturing application or a computer assisted manufacturing application. One StlCh mode]ling tool used to collect and order the data is IDE~O. One IDEFO package is SofTech Inc. s "SADT"'M Structllred Analysis and Design Technique.
IDEFO is used to produce a function model. This function model is a struct-lred representation of the functions of a system or environment, e.g., a business or manufacturing system or environment, and of the information and objects which interrelate these functions. The model consists of diagrams, text~ and glossary, all cross-referenced to each other. IDEFO is the functional methodology or tool for analyzing the architecture of a system, for the purpose of improving the measurements of the system.
A group of IDEFO models form an "architecture." In an "architecture" the systems environment being modeled is comprised of many componen-t subsys-tems, organizations, and/or technologies. These subsystems, organizations, and/or technologies must work together to accomplish the system ~0~3~
EN9-91-138 ~
objective. The "archi-tecture" is ~ hlueprint, framework, or template that defines~ usually yraphica]ly, the fundamental relationships of -the system. These fundamental rela-tionships include, by way of exemplification and not limitation, (i) functional interfaces. (ii) common~ shared, and discrete information, including information flows, and (iii) dynamic interaction of resources.
IDEFO builds from "box and arrow" graphics of individual cells. A typical cell is shown in FIGURE 4, "Prior Art." The arrows represent interfaces, such as inputs, cons-traints,'controls~ constrain-ts?~ and outputs.
Particularly to be no-ted is -the structure of a cell.
Controls and constraints enter -the top of the box, the materials or information acted UpOIl enters the left side of the box, and the output leaves the right side of the box..
The mechanism which operates on the box~ that is, the person or the automated effector, enters -through the bottom of the box.
The function of the box is anything that can be described by an active verb, as "tighten," "attach,"
"measure," "assemble," "transcribe~" "evaluate," "classify,"
"construct," "solve," "adapt~" "resolve," "develop,"
"compare," "rank," "order." or the like. The arrows that connect to a box represent objects or information needed by the box to perform its function~ as "da-ta." The "input" is something that is to be worked on by the "function." The "output" is the result of the work done by the "function."
The "control" is the set of conditions and circumstances that govern or control the "function." The "mechanism" is the effector that carries out the function. A "mechanism"
may be a person, a computer, a we]der, or a machine tool.
An IDEFO model starts by representing the entire system as a simple unit~ e.g., a box, with arrow interfaces to the outside world. This single box is then detailed on another diagram. In this second level diagram major boxes, representing major sub-systems, are connec-ted by arrows.
These individual boxes represent major subdivisions, subfunctions, or modules of the single parent module. This ~7~3~
decomposition process has decompc)sed -the single parent into a complete set of subsys-tems, each represented by a box whose boundaries are deflned and connec-ted by the interface arrows. Each of the subsys-tems may be further decomposed.
One aspect of the hierarchica] nature of IDEFO is that each box or cell is composed of a fini-te number of boxes or cells. This number is typically from three to six. The purpose of the upper limitation of six subcells is to force the use of a hierarchy to describe complex functions. The purpose of a minimum ]ower limit of three subcells is to force enough detail into the ]evel to make decomposition or resolution of interest.
The output of the IDEFO process is utilized, after processing by a trained Information Science or Systems Science professional, as the input to an application development system. This application development system may be a more computer compatible model for further downstream processing, or it may be the enterprise software product, for example, a computer assisted manufacturing application, a computer integrated manufacturing application, or a data base management or -transaction management application.
Typically, the application developmen-t system is a Computer aided software engineering (CASE) application.
Computer aided software engineering (CASE) is a powerful software development tool tha-t is useful in process modelling and in application development. As both a software development tool and as a process modelling tool, it has the potential of reducing backlogs and maintenance. However, as pointed out by Chang-Yang Lin and Chen-Hua Chung, in "End-User Computing In A CASE Environment,"
J.Info.Syst.Manage., Vol.8, No. 2 pp. 17-21 (1991), CASE
tools are still used primarily by information science professionals, rather then by end-users.
This is a serious shortcoming of CASE tools, because as new conditions and opportuni-ties arise, the end-users are the best judges of end-user needs and ways of doing business. This is especially true in the situation where 3 ~ ~
the end-user input is a subjective and qualitative description of an enterprise process, requiring a sequence of separate and distinc-t steps -to yield the final product.
Each of these separate and distinct steps may require significant Information Science and/or Sys-tems Science professional invo]vement, with fur-ther isolation and distance from the end user. CASE -tools can not reach their full potential without significant end-user involvement.
In this regard, Lin and Chung posi-t that CASE i5 a form of Group Decision Support System (GDSS), in -that end-users can participate in the CASE process. However, end-user participation in the CASE process and environment requires structuring the CASE environment to support end-user applications development. And, in the situation where the original end-user input is a process description that must be modelled, significant restructuritlg of the modelling and CASE environments is required.
CASE is an environment of integrated tools that automate the systems development process. Ultimately, Lin and Chung argue that CASE should be able to capture requirements in natural English statements and automatically generate systems that meet these requiremen-ts. However, they point out that this is not an easily attainable goal. This is because CASE tools only automate limited portions of the software life cycles, i.e., code generators and diagramming tools.
In this regard, the CASE environment can be regarded as a set of software tools that provide some degree of automation to one or more phases of the system life cycle, e.g., code generation. CASE accomplishes -this through a central repository, rules, reusab]e software, and tools that support process modelling and systems development.
Exemplary systems development tools include, solely by way of exemplification and not limitation include:
1. Diagramming tools for analysis and design of an enterprise s da-ta, activities, and interac-tions.
~7~5 EN9-9l--138 6 2. Dictionary -tools for recording. maintaini.ng, and reporting sys-tem de-tails.
3. Prototypiny tool~s that support, for example, user interfaces, inpu-ts~ clialogs~ outputs, forms, and reports -through -the use of screen generators, report genera-tors, ancl menu genera-tors. These prototyp:ing tools may also be -the outputs of the CASE system.
4. Code construction tools including code generators to automate conversion of specifications into high level languages and data bases.
To be noted is that the set of CASE tools encourages user-developer interaction by its support of diagramming and programming tools. This gives rise to Joint Application Development (JAD). JAD is an extension of CASE, relying on interviewing and user understandable user interfaces.
Process modelling and bu.ilding applications from process models are normal CASE appl.ications. Process definition is the normal form of end-user interface to the CASE environment for process model driven applications.
Even this level of interface requires heavy Information Scientist and/or System Scientist involvement. In a process definition environment, users use, for example, entity-relationship diagrams and process hierarchy diagrams to produce a graphic representation or model of an actual or proposed system. These activities may involve GDSS
methodology as well as IDEFO methodology.
The output of the end-user process modelling process is not a direct input to the CASE environment. In the case of IDEFO, the processing modelling output is heavily anno-tated graphics data. This is true even when -the IDEFO model is created using a computer based system, such as COINSTM. For this reason, CASE is s-til], primarily~ an Information Science professional tool.
~7~31L~3 Ein and Chung clo not prcpose all ln-terface to the end-user. To the contrary, they propose a new genera-tion of CASE tools and environments. I.in and Chung propose -that this new generation of CASE -toois s-~ar-t from a task oriented, icon based system, supporting sophisticated application generation through the direct manipulation of icons representing reusab]e codes. This new CASE environment would combine proto-typi.ng wi.th a simplified and standardized, user friendly, graphica] user interface, and would have bui.lt in expert systems.
Another end-user sof-tware devel.opment system is the Information Center Expert (ICE). which is described, for example, by Ajay S. Vin:~e, Doug:Las Ro Vogel, and Jay F.
Nunamaker, Jr., in "Validation of a Knowledge-Based System:
The ICE Case," Proceedings of the Twenty=Third Annual Hawaii International_Conference On Systems Sciences,_1990, Volume 3, pp. 239-246. ICR is an expert system that is designed to allow an end user to develop application specific software.
It does this through a graphical user interface, and four subsystems:
1. A profiling subsystem that collects information necessary to generate a user profile and a problem profile.
2. A requirement - software matching subsystem that initiates an algorithm to match the user profile and the problem profile with a profile of the software tools supported by ICE.
3. A tracking subsystem that captures the "consultation" results.
4. A maintenance subsystem that maintains information about -tool resources and profiles.
ICE is an expert sys-tem based "ma-tching" system, that matches requirements wi-th available software tools and packages.
EN9-91-138 ~ 2 ~ 7 ~
The goal of the vario~ls sys-tems is to empower the end-user to develop the end-use specific tools, such as process models. The existing sys-tems fail -to accomplish this empowermen-t, especially in the case of process modelling. This is because the existing systems fail to provide a user driven proc:ess moclelling environment having an ou-tput that is compa-tible as a CASE input, which would thereby allow an end-user group -to define its process and develop software to model -the user-deflned process.
The above described systems. i.e.~ expert systems and enhanced CASE environments, while being strong attempts to empower non-experts, i.e., end users~ to complete the steps of creating process models and process model driven application software in the same way that an expert would, require a high level of software development expertise on the part of the end-user. Thus, they fail to take advantage of the end-user s superior knowledge of the process being modelled.
Nor do the above systems even attempt to integrate group decision suppor-t methods and IDEFO type process modelling tools with computer assisted software engineering methods in a single, interactive. synergistic process definition and modelling system.
Thus, a clear need exists for an interactive, integrated process definition and process modelling system, having a group decision support system with a computer assisted software engineering system.
In this regard, a significant shortcoming of IDEFO
modelling is that the IDEFO -tool depends on interviewing.
This is a long and tedious process. To some extent this shortcoming is obviated by the use of a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) as the upstream or front end of IDEFO.
Alternatively, a package such as Eclec-tic Systems COINS'M
Corporate/Office Information Network System can be utilized.
Eclectic Systems COINSIM Corporate/Office Information Network System is a set of computer programs which suppor-t EN9-91-138 9 2~75~
IDEFO. COINS bypasses -the interviewing and pencil and paper modelling of IDEFO and leads the trained user through a computerized IDEFO analysis. COINS does this through graphic support tools, development and maintenance of models, including various levels of subsystem models, and automatic maintenance of logs and files.
However, even with COINS, a significant shortcoming of the IDEFO system is the requirement for the intervention of trained professionals. These trained professionals include modellers who actually prepare the model. The modellers must interact with commenters who are normally end-users trained in IDEFO modelling. The commenters are sufficiently expert in IDEFO modelling that they can offer structured comments in writing. The modellers must also interact with readers, who are end-users sufficiently expert in IDEFO
modelling to read and critique -the IDEFO output. The requirement for commenters and readers serves to distance the larger portion of the end-user community from IDEFO
process. This continues to be a problem in migrating an IDEFO model, including a COINS'M derived IDEFO model, downstream to a computer assisted manufacturing or computer integrated manufacturing model.
Thus, a need exists for a tool to migrate a process model, as an IDEFO model, to an application, as a Computer Assisted Manufacturing application, a Computer Integrated Manufacturing Model, or a Data Base Management Model.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
It is a primary object of the invention to empower end-users to develop their own application specific software, including process models.
It is another object of the invention to facilitate this empowerment in a group setting.
It is a further primary objec-t of the invention to provide a user driven process modelling environment, in ~7~31~
which the end-user group defines its process and then models the user defined process.
In this regard, it is a sti]l further primary object of the invention to empower non-experts, i.e., end users, to complete the steps of creating process models in the same way that an expert wou]d, thereby taking advantage of the end-user's superior knowledge of the process.
It is a further object of the invention to integrate process modelling with process models driven computer assisted software engineering methods to define and develop process models and thereafter build enterprise application software.
It is a still further object of the invention to integrate group decision support methodology, process modelling and the application development process into a single, interactive, synergistic process modelling and application development system.
It is a still further object of the invention to integrate a business process definition functional modelling tool, as IDEFO, with a modelling tool or a rules repository.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
These and other objects of the invention are obtained by the integrated process modelling system of the invention, including (1) an integrated process modelling group decision support subsystem, such as the Eclectic Software, Inc., "COINS" to create an IDEFO model, (2) an integrated process modelling application development subsystem, such as the modelling tools in the Knowledgeware, Inc., "Application Development Workbench," and (3) an integrated bridge subsystem providing a software link between the process modelling group decision support subsystem and the process modelling application development subsystem.
The integrated process modelling system provides a user driven process modelliny and application development EN9-91-138 ]1 2 07~ 3 ~ ~
environment, in which the end-user group defines the process and develops the software model to model the user-defined process. In this way a non-expert can complete the steps of creating a sophisticated process model in the same way that an expert would. This is because the end-user knows the real process better than an outside developer.
More particularly, the integrated system back integrates the process modelling sub-system, used to develop the process model, e.g., the process modelliny tools in a computer assisted software engineering workbench and toolkit, into the group decision support system used to define the process.
The integrated system is particularly useful for creating enterprise specific process models and applications based upon the models. The group decision support subsystem is used by the participants, e.g.~ end-users, for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. Using this protocol, the bridge sub-system transforms the output of the group decision support subsystem into the input of the application development subsystem, in this case a process modelling system. The application development subsystem is used for writing the process model based on the bridge transformed output of the group decision support subsystem.
The front end input may be group decision support subsystem or a process modelling specific user interface.
One such process modelling specific user interface is Eclectic Software Inc., "COINS"~ used to develop IDEFO
process models. The user interface is characterized by having one or more of the following group decision support tools:
(l). Electronic brainstorming for facilitating substantially simultaneous and anonymous information collection, with concomitant exchange of ideas and comments about the collected information from the participants.
(2). Issue Analysis and Ide!a Organization capability.
This allows -the par-ticipants to group, categorize and define issues and ;.deas from the collected information.
~3). Voting Application capability. This facilitates ranking and prioritization of issues and ideas.
(4). Topic Commenter capability to facilitate viewing and comment on the issues and ideas.
To be noted is that the set of CASE tools encourages user-developer interaction by its support of diagramming and programming tools. This gives rise to Joint Application Development (JAD). JAD is an extension of CASE, relying on interviewing and user understandable user interfaces.
Process modelling and bu.ilding applications from process models are normal CASE appl.ications. Process definition is the normal form of end-user interface to the CASE environment for process model driven applications.
Even this level of interface requires heavy Information Scientist and/or System Scientist involvement. In a process definition environment, users use, for example, entity-relationship diagrams and process hierarchy diagrams to produce a graphic representation or model of an actual or proposed system. These activities may involve GDSS
methodology as well as IDEFO methodology.
The output of the end-user process modelling process is not a direct input to the CASE environment. In the case of IDEFO, the processing modelling output is heavily anno-tated graphics data. This is true even when -the IDEFO model is created using a computer based system, such as COINSTM. For this reason, CASE is s-til], primarily~ an Information Science professional tool.
~7~31L~3 Ein and Chung clo not prcpose all ln-terface to the end-user. To the contrary, they propose a new genera-tion of CASE tools and environments. I.in and Chung propose -that this new generation of CASE -toois s-~ar-t from a task oriented, icon based system, supporting sophisticated application generation through the direct manipulation of icons representing reusab]e codes. This new CASE environment would combine proto-typi.ng wi.th a simplified and standardized, user friendly, graphica] user interface, and would have bui.lt in expert systems.
Another end-user sof-tware devel.opment system is the Information Center Expert (ICE). which is described, for example, by Ajay S. Vin:~e, Doug:Las Ro Vogel, and Jay F.
Nunamaker, Jr., in "Validation of a Knowledge-Based System:
The ICE Case," Proceedings of the Twenty=Third Annual Hawaii International_Conference On Systems Sciences,_1990, Volume 3, pp. 239-246. ICR is an expert system that is designed to allow an end user to develop application specific software.
It does this through a graphical user interface, and four subsystems:
1. A profiling subsystem that collects information necessary to generate a user profile and a problem profile.
2. A requirement - software matching subsystem that initiates an algorithm to match the user profile and the problem profile with a profile of the software tools supported by ICE.
3. A tracking subsystem that captures the "consultation" results.
4. A maintenance subsystem that maintains information about -tool resources and profiles.
ICE is an expert sys-tem based "ma-tching" system, that matches requirements wi-th available software tools and packages.
EN9-91-138 ~ 2 ~ 7 ~
The goal of the vario~ls sys-tems is to empower the end-user to develop the end-use specific tools, such as process models. The existing sys-tems fail -to accomplish this empowermen-t, especially in the case of process modelling. This is because the existing systems fail to provide a user driven proc:ess moclelling environment having an ou-tput that is compa-tible as a CASE input, which would thereby allow an end-user group -to define its process and develop software to model -the user-deflned process.
The above described systems. i.e.~ expert systems and enhanced CASE environments, while being strong attempts to empower non-experts, i.e., end users~ to complete the steps of creating process models and process model driven application software in the same way that an expert would, require a high level of software development expertise on the part of the end-user. Thus, they fail to take advantage of the end-user s superior knowledge of the process being modelled.
Nor do the above systems even attempt to integrate group decision suppor-t methods and IDEFO type process modelling tools with computer assisted software engineering methods in a single, interactive. synergistic process definition and modelling system.
Thus, a clear need exists for an interactive, integrated process definition and process modelling system, having a group decision support system with a computer assisted software engineering system.
In this regard, a significant shortcoming of IDEFO
modelling is that the IDEFO -tool depends on interviewing.
This is a long and tedious process. To some extent this shortcoming is obviated by the use of a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) as the upstream or front end of IDEFO.
Alternatively, a package such as Eclec-tic Systems COINS'M
Corporate/Office Information Network System can be utilized.
Eclectic Systems COINSIM Corporate/Office Information Network System is a set of computer programs which suppor-t EN9-91-138 9 2~75~
IDEFO. COINS bypasses -the interviewing and pencil and paper modelling of IDEFO and leads the trained user through a computerized IDEFO analysis. COINS does this through graphic support tools, development and maintenance of models, including various levels of subsystem models, and automatic maintenance of logs and files.
However, even with COINS, a significant shortcoming of the IDEFO system is the requirement for the intervention of trained professionals. These trained professionals include modellers who actually prepare the model. The modellers must interact with commenters who are normally end-users trained in IDEFO modelling. The commenters are sufficiently expert in IDEFO modelling that they can offer structured comments in writing. The modellers must also interact with readers, who are end-users sufficiently expert in IDEFO
modelling to read and critique -the IDEFO output. The requirement for commenters and readers serves to distance the larger portion of the end-user community from IDEFO
process. This continues to be a problem in migrating an IDEFO model, including a COINS'M derived IDEFO model, downstream to a computer assisted manufacturing or computer integrated manufacturing model.
Thus, a need exists for a tool to migrate a process model, as an IDEFO model, to an application, as a Computer Assisted Manufacturing application, a Computer Integrated Manufacturing Model, or a Data Base Management Model.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
It is a primary object of the invention to empower end-users to develop their own application specific software, including process models.
It is another object of the invention to facilitate this empowerment in a group setting.
It is a further primary objec-t of the invention to provide a user driven process modelling environment, in ~7~31~
which the end-user group defines its process and then models the user defined process.
In this regard, it is a sti]l further primary object of the invention to empower non-experts, i.e., end users, to complete the steps of creating process models in the same way that an expert wou]d, thereby taking advantage of the end-user's superior knowledge of the process.
It is a further object of the invention to integrate process modelling with process models driven computer assisted software engineering methods to define and develop process models and thereafter build enterprise application software.
It is a still further object of the invention to integrate group decision support methodology, process modelling and the application development process into a single, interactive, synergistic process modelling and application development system.
It is a still further object of the invention to integrate a business process definition functional modelling tool, as IDEFO, with a modelling tool or a rules repository.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
These and other objects of the invention are obtained by the integrated process modelling system of the invention, including (1) an integrated process modelling group decision support subsystem, such as the Eclectic Software, Inc., "COINS" to create an IDEFO model, (2) an integrated process modelling application development subsystem, such as the modelling tools in the Knowledgeware, Inc., "Application Development Workbench," and (3) an integrated bridge subsystem providing a software link between the process modelling group decision support subsystem and the process modelling application development subsystem.
The integrated process modelling system provides a user driven process modelliny and application development EN9-91-138 ]1 2 07~ 3 ~ ~
environment, in which the end-user group defines the process and develops the software model to model the user-defined process. In this way a non-expert can complete the steps of creating a sophisticated process model in the same way that an expert would. This is because the end-user knows the real process better than an outside developer.
More particularly, the integrated system back integrates the process modelling sub-system, used to develop the process model, e.g., the process modelliny tools in a computer assisted software engineering workbench and toolkit, into the group decision support system used to define the process.
The integrated system is particularly useful for creating enterprise specific process models and applications based upon the models. The group decision support subsystem is used by the participants, e.g.~ end-users, for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. Using this protocol, the bridge sub-system transforms the output of the group decision support subsystem into the input of the application development subsystem, in this case a process modelling system. The application development subsystem is used for writing the process model based on the bridge transformed output of the group decision support subsystem.
The front end input may be group decision support subsystem or a process modelling specific user interface.
One such process modelling specific user interface is Eclectic Software Inc., "COINS"~ used to develop IDEFO
process models. The user interface is characterized by having one or more of the following group decision support tools:
(l). Electronic brainstorming for facilitating substantially simultaneous and anonymous information collection, with concomitant exchange of ideas and comments about the collected information from the participants.
(2). Issue Analysis and Ide!a Organization capability.
This allows -the par-ticipants to group, categorize and define issues and ;.deas from the collected information.
~3). Voting Application capability. This facilitates ranking and prioritization of issues and ideas.
(4). Topic Commenter capability to facilitate viewing and comment on the issues and ideas.
(5). A dictionary means that allows participants to define words that are ambiguous.
(6). Specific software for compatibilizing the output of the system to the input of either the bridge subsystem or the application development subsystem.
The process model application development subsystem includes one or more of the following tools:
(l). An Association Matrix tool that allows users to describe relationships between objects. This can provide a matrix output or a tabular output.
(2). A Decomposition Diagrammer tool that allows users to decompose objects into greater levels of detail.
(3). A Property Matrix Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe the properties of objects.
(4). An Entity Relationship Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe data requirements the enterprise as well as the data requirements of and between objects within the enterprise.
(5). A Data Flow Diagrammer Tool that allows users to identify data flowing into, out of, and between objects.
207a~1~
The process modelling user interface and/or group decision support subsystem and the process modelling application development subsystem of the integrated system are joined by a bridge subsystem. The bridge subsystem converts the output of -the group decision support subsystem to compatible input of the application development subsystem.
THE FIGURES
The invention may be understood by reference to the FIGURES appended hereto.
FIGURE 1 is a schematic view of the integrated system of the invention.
FIGURE 2 is a block diagram of the integrated system of the invention.
FIGURE 3, which is made up of 13 sheets, FIGURES 3A
through 3M, is a REXX listing of the bridge subsystem of the invention.
FIGURE 4, denominated "Prior Art," shows a Function Box with Interface Arrows of the type used in IDEFO modelling.
FIGURE 5, also denominated "Prior Art" shows a function box for a system entitled "Make Part" with input "Raw Material," controls "Blueprint." "Work Order," and "Prioritized Schedule," mechanisms "Tools," "Machine," and "Template," and outputs "Fabricated Part" and "Scrap."
FIGURE 5 also shows the "Approve Schedule" subsystem providing a "Prioritized Schedu]e" to the "Make Part"
subsystem as a constraint, and an "Allocate Tool" subsystem allocating a mechanism, "Tool." to the "Make Part"
subsystem.
FIGURE 6, also denominated "Prior Art" shows the inter-relationships of a cell with other cells in the system.
EN9-91-138 14 207~3~ ~
FIGURE 7, also denominated "Prior Ar-t," illustrates how the inputs, outputs, constraints, and mechanisms of the higher level cell are preserved during decomposition or resolution. To be noted ls that FIGURES 6 and 7 illustrate the contextual nature of IDEF0 modelling, which shows the individual cell as being part of a ]arger whole, with defined interfaces.
FIGURE 8, also denominated "Prior Art," shows a node chart, also referred to as a node tree. The node tree connects the functions shown in FIGURE 7.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TME INVENTION
The integrated process definition and modelling system of the invention is shown in the FIGURES. The system 1 includes an integrated user interface subsystem, 11, which may be group decision support subsystem, or a process modelling system, as an IDEF0 subsystem, an integrated process modelling subsystem, 21, and an integrated bridge subsystem, 31, providing a software link between the user interface subsystem, 11, and the process modelling subsystem, 21.
The user interface subsystem, 11, of the invention may be a structured analysis and design technique system, as IDEF0 or IDEF0 with a COINSIM front end.
Structured analysis and design techniques graphically describe complex systems that, because of many complex interactions, are hard to describe on a human scale.
Structured analysis and design techniques, such as IDEFO
have a co-ordinated set of diagrams, starting from a global, high level description of the system, and ending with detailed (graphical and textual) descriptions of each low level subsystem. These sets of diagrams are hierarchically arranged from the highest level, least detailed, to the lowest level, most detailed. Activities are further connected arrows showing connections between activities, i.e., inputs, constraints, mechanisms, and outputs. The sequential nature of these connections lies in the output of 207~31~
one activity being an input, constraint, or mechanism of a subsequent or prior (wi-th feedback) activity.
Alternatively, -the user interface susbsytem may be any standard group decision support subsystem. The preferred GDSS's for end user process definition and modelling increase the overall quality of effort put forward by the team members, wh le focusing the efforts of the end-user team members toward the model. This is done in an environment that increases consensus reaching while decreasing decision making time.
One suitable GDSS is "Team Focus," a facilitator led, GDSS. "Team Focus" uses desktop computers, connected through a local area network. It allows participants to anonymously generate, exchange, categorize, and prioritize ideas, and formulate plans and policies based on the ideas.
As described below, "Team Focus" has electronic brainstorming, issue analysi.s/idea organization, voting, topic commenter, alternative evaluation, policy formation, group dictionary, and questionnaire tools.
"Team Focus," like other suitable GDSS environment tools and environments, is characterized by having one or more of the following group decision support tools:
(l). Electronic brainstorming for facilitating substantially simultaneous and anonymous information collection, with concomitant exchange of ideas and comments about the collected information from the participants.
(2). Issue Analysis and Idea Organization capability.
This allows the participants to group, categorize and define issues and ideas from the collected information.
(3). Voting Application capability. This facilitates ranking and prioritization of issues and ideas.
~7~31~
(4). Topic Commenter capabllity to facilitate viewing and comment on the issues and ideas.
(5~. A dictionary means that al]ows participants -to define words that are ambiguous.
(6). Specific sof-tware for compatibilizing the output of the group decision support system to the input of either the bridge subsystem or the application development subsystem.
According to a particularly preferred embodiment of the invention the user interface is a group decision support system, such as "Team Focus," have an output which provides the input to a COINSlM front end to IDEFO.
The process application subsystem, 21, is a CASE
workbench subsystem to support the analysis and design of a software system. This is generally accomplished through support of graphical notations~ tools and concepts.
Exemplary is Structured Design. The CASE environment allows for continuous and smooth transi-tion from the modelling stage carried out in the IDEFO and/or GDSS subsystem, 11, to the modelling-dependent appllcation development stage of the application, with data sharing, consistency, and compatibility between the CASE too]s The application development susbsystem, 21, includes one or more of the following tools:
(1). An Association Matrix tool that allows users to describe relationships between objects. This can provide a matrix output or a tabular output.
(2). A Decomposition Diagrammer tool that allows users to decompose objects into greater levels of detail.
(3). A Property Matrix Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe the properties of objects.
2B~31~
(4). An Entity Relationship Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe data requirements the enterprise as well as the data requirements of and between objects within the enterprise.
(5). A Data Flow Diayrammer Too] that allows users to identify data flowing into~ Ollt of, and between objects.
The user interface subsystem, 11, which may combine process modelling and group decision support capabilities, and the application development subsystem, 21, of the integrated system, 1, are joined by a bridge subsystem, 31.
The bridge subsystem, 31, converts the output of the group decision support subsystem, 11, -to compatible input of the application development subsystem, 21.
The bridge subsystem, 31, opens the output file of the user interface subsystem, ll, and also opens the input file of the application development subsystem, 21. The bridge susbsystem, 21, determines the file contents, that is, does the file contain data information or process information ?
Next, the file system removes the software system delimiters and protocols inserted by the user interface subsystem, 11.
The bridge subsystem, 31, then concatenates token numbers to name data and property codes to support data. These data type are used by the bridge subsystem, 31, to build CASE
compatible output files, and to write to the files.
The bridge subsystem, 31, integrates the user interface subsystem, 11, whi.ch has characteristics and capabilities of one or both of a process modelling subsystem and/or a group decision support subsystem, and the application development subsystem, 21, into an interactive, synergistic system, 1.
The user interface subsystem, 11, is used by the participants, e.g., end-users, for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. Using this protocol, the bridge sub-system, 31, transforms the output of the user interface subsystem, ll, into the input of the application development subsystem, 21. The application development subsystem, 21, is used for writing software based on the 207~31.~
brldge transformed outpu-t of tlle user interface subsystem, FIGURE 3 shows a REXX l.anyuage listing of one exemplification of the invention. While a REXX language listing is shown it is, of course, to be understood that other languages may be used, e.g.~ C, Pascal, Fortran, Basic, assembly language, or the li.ke.
Thus, according to the method of the invention there is provided a ùser driven process modelling environment, in which the end-user group defines its process model and develops software to build the process model. The integrated system of the invention empowers non-experts, i.e., end users, to complete the steps of creating models in a Group Decision Support System environment in the same way that an expert would. This is because the end-user knows the process better than an outside developer.
More particularly, utilizing the bridge subsystem, the integrated system back integrates the application development sub-system, used to deve].op the model, e.g., a computer assisted software engineering workbench and toolkit, into the group decision support system used to define the system. Thus, the integrated system of the invention expedites creating enterprise specific process models and writing software based on the enterprise-specific process model.
While the invention has been described with respect to certain preferred embodiments and exemplifications thereof, it is not intended to limit the scope of the invention thereby, but solely by the claims appended hereto.
The process model application development subsystem includes one or more of the following tools:
(l). An Association Matrix tool that allows users to describe relationships between objects. This can provide a matrix output or a tabular output.
(2). A Decomposition Diagrammer tool that allows users to decompose objects into greater levels of detail.
(3). A Property Matrix Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe the properties of objects.
(4). An Entity Relationship Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe data requirements the enterprise as well as the data requirements of and between objects within the enterprise.
(5). A Data Flow Diagrammer Tool that allows users to identify data flowing into, out of, and between objects.
207a~1~
The process modelling user interface and/or group decision support subsystem and the process modelling application development subsystem of the integrated system are joined by a bridge subsystem. The bridge subsystem converts the output of -the group decision support subsystem to compatible input of the application development subsystem.
THE FIGURES
The invention may be understood by reference to the FIGURES appended hereto.
FIGURE 1 is a schematic view of the integrated system of the invention.
FIGURE 2 is a block diagram of the integrated system of the invention.
FIGURE 3, which is made up of 13 sheets, FIGURES 3A
through 3M, is a REXX listing of the bridge subsystem of the invention.
FIGURE 4, denominated "Prior Art," shows a Function Box with Interface Arrows of the type used in IDEFO modelling.
FIGURE 5, also denominated "Prior Art" shows a function box for a system entitled "Make Part" with input "Raw Material," controls "Blueprint." "Work Order," and "Prioritized Schedule," mechanisms "Tools," "Machine," and "Template," and outputs "Fabricated Part" and "Scrap."
FIGURE 5 also shows the "Approve Schedule" subsystem providing a "Prioritized Schedu]e" to the "Make Part"
subsystem as a constraint, and an "Allocate Tool" subsystem allocating a mechanism, "Tool." to the "Make Part"
subsystem.
FIGURE 6, also denominated "Prior Art" shows the inter-relationships of a cell with other cells in the system.
EN9-91-138 14 207~3~ ~
FIGURE 7, also denominated "Prior Ar-t," illustrates how the inputs, outputs, constraints, and mechanisms of the higher level cell are preserved during decomposition or resolution. To be noted ls that FIGURES 6 and 7 illustrate the contextual nature of IDEF0 modelling, which shows the individual cell as being part of a ]arger whole, with defined interfaces.
FIGURE 8, also denominated "Prior Art," shows a node chart, also referred to as a node tree. The node tree connects the functions shown in FIGURE 7.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TME INVENTION
The integrated process definition and modelling system of the invention is shown in the FIGURES. The system 1 includes an integrated user interface subsystem, 11, which may be group decision support subsystem, or a process modelling system, as an IDEF0 subsystem, an integrated process modelling subsystem, 21, and an integrated bridge subsystem, 31, providing a software link between the user interface subsystem, 11, and the process modelling subsystem, 21.
The user interface subsystem, 11, of the invention may be a structured analysis and design technique system, as IDEF0 or IDEF0 with a COINSIM front end.
Structured analysis and design techniques graphically describe complex systems that, because of many complex interactions, are hard to describe on a human scale.
Structured analysis and design techniques, such as IDEFO
have a co-ordinated set of diagrams, starting from a global, high level description of the system, and ending with detailed (graphical and textual) descriptions of each low level subsystem. These sets of diagrams are hierarchically arranged from the highest level, least detailed, to the lowest level, most detailed. Activities are further connected arrows showing connections between activities, i.e., inputs, constraints, mechanisms, and outputs. The sequential nature of these connections lies in the output of 207~31~
one activity being an input, constraint, or mechanism of a subsequent or prior (wi-th feedback) activity.
Alternatively, -the user interface susbsytem may be any standard group decision support subsystem. The preferred GDSS's for end user process definition and modelling increase the overall quality of effort put forward by the team members, wh le focusing the efforts of the end-user team members toward the model. This is done in an environment that increases consensus reaching while decreasing decision making time.
One suitable GDSS is "Team Focus," a facilitator led, GDSS. "Team Focus" uses desktop computers, connected through a local area network. It allows participants to anonymously generate, exchange, categorize, and prioritize ideas, and formulate plans and policies based on the ideas.
As described below, "Team Focus" has electronic brainstorming, issue analysi.s/idea organization, voting, topic commenter, alternative evaluation, policy formation, group dictionary, and questionnaire tools.
"Team Focus," like other suitable GDSS environment tools and environments, is characterized by having one or more of the following group decision support tools:
(l). Electronic brainstorming for facilitating substantially simultaneous and anonymous information collection, with concomitant exchange of ideas and comments about the collected information from the participants.
(2). Issue Analysis and Idea Organization capability.
This allows the participants to group, categorize and define issues and ideas from the collected information.
(3). Voting Application capability. This facilitates ranking and prioritization of issues and ideas.
~7~31~
(4). Topic Commenter capabllity to facilitate viewing and comment on the issues and ideas.
(5~. A dictionary means that al]ows participants -to define words that are ambiguous.
(6). Specific sof-tware for compatibilizing the output of the group decision support system to the input of either the bridge subsystem or the application development subsystem.
According to a particularly preferred embodiment of the invention the user interface is a group decision support system, such as "Team Focus," have an output which provides the input to a COINSlM front end to IDEFO.
The process application subsystem, 21, is a CASE
workbench subsystem to support the analysis and design of a software system. This is generally accomplished through support of graphical notations~ tools and concepts.
Exemplary is Structured Design. The CASE environment allows for continuous and smooth transi-tion from the modelling stage carried out in the IDEFO and/or GDSS subsystem, 11, to the modelling-dependent appllcation development stage of the application, with data sharing, consistency, and compatibility between the CASE too]s The application development susbsystem, 21, includes one or more of the following tools:
(1). An Association Matrix tool that allows users to describe relationships between objects. This can provide a matrix output or a tabular output.
(2). A Decomposition Diagrammer tool that allows users to decompose objects into greater levels of detail.
(3). A Property Matrix Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe the properties of objects.
2B~31~
(4). An Entity Relationship Diagrammer tool that allows users to describe data requirements the enterprise as well as the data requirements of and between objects within the enterprise.
(5). A Data Flow Diayrammer Too] that allows users to identify data flowing into~ Ollt of, and between objects.
The user interface subsystem, 11, which may combine process modelling and group decision support capabilities, and the application development subsystem, 21, of the integrated system, 1, are joined by a bridge subsystem, 31.
The bridge subsystem, 31, converts the output of the group decision support subsystem, 11, -to compatible input of the application development subsystem, 21.
The bridge subsystem, 31, opens the output file of the user interface subsystem, ll, and also opens the input file of the application development subsystem, 21. The bridge susbsystem, 21, determines the file contents, that is, does the file contain data information or process information ?
Next, the file system removes the software system delimiters and protocols inserted by the user interface subsystem, 11.
The bridge subsystem, 31, then concatenates token numbers to name data and property codes to support data. These data type are used by the bridge subsystem, 31, to build CASE
compatible output files, and to write to the files.
The bridge subsystem, 31, integrates the user interface subsystem, 11, whi.ch has characteristics and capabilities of one or both of a process modelling subsystem and/or a group decision support subsystem, and the application development subsystem, 21, into an interactive, synergistic system, 1.
The user interface subsystem, 11, is used by the participants, e.g., end-users, for creating and ordering a process model according to a protocol. Using this protocol, the bridge sub-system, 31, transforms the output of the user interface subsystem, ll, into the input of the application development subsystem, 21. The application development subsystem, 21, is used for writing software based on the 207~31.~
brldge transformed outpu-t of tlle user interface subsystem, FIGURE 3 shows a REXX l.anyuage listing of one exemplification of the invention. While a REXX language listing is shown it is, of course, to be understood that other languages may be used, e.g.~ C, Pascal, Fortran, Basic, assembly language, or the li.ke.
Thus, according to the method of the invention there is provided a ùser driven process modelling environment, in which the end-user group defines its process model and develops software to build the process model. The integrated system of the invention empowers non-experts, i.e., end users, to complete the steps of creating models in a Group Decision Support System environment in the same way that an expert would. This is because the end-user knows the process better than an outside developer.
More particularly, utilizing the bridge subsystem, the integrated system back integrates the application development sub-system, used to deve].op the model, e.g., a computer assisted software engineering workbench and toolkit, into the group decision support system used to define the system. Thus, the integrated system of the invention expedites creating enterprise specific process models and writing software based on the enterprise-specific process model.
While the invention has been described with respect to certain preferred embodiments and exemplifications thereof, it is not intended to limit the scope of the invention thereby, but solely by the claims appended hereto.
Claims (6)
1. An integrated system for creating a process model, including a user interface subsystem for defining a process according to a protocol, a bridge sub-system, and an application development subsystem for modelling the process based on the output of the group decision support subsystem.
2. The integrated system of claim 1 wherein the user interface subsystem is a group decision support subsystem and comprises one or more of:
(1). means for substantially simultaneously and anonymously collecting information, and exchanging ideas and comments about the said information from participants;
(2). issue analysis and idea organization means for the participants to group, categorize and define issues and ideas from the collected information;
(3). voting application means and alternative evaluation means for the participants to rank and prioritize issues and ideas;
(4). topic commenter means for participants to view and comment upon issues and ideas; and (5). dictionary means.
(1). means for substantially simultaneously and anonymously collecting information, and exchanging ideas and comments about the said information from participants;
(2). issue analysis and idea organization means for the participants to group, categorize and define issues and ideas from the collected information;
(3). voting application means and alternative evaluation means for the participants to rank and prioritize issues and ideas;
(4). topic commenter means for participants to view and comment upon issues and ideas; and (5). dictionary means.
3. The integrated system of claim 1 wherein the user interface subsystem is a structured analysis and design subsystem and comprises means for creating a co-ordinated, hierarchical set of individual function diagrams of a system, said individual functions diagrams being interconnected by arrows showing inputs, constraints, mechanisms, and outputs.
4. The integrated system of claim 1 wherein the process application development subsystem comprises one or more of:
(1). means for describing relationships between objects;
(2). means to decompose objects into greater levels of detail;
(3). means to describe properties of objects;
(4). means to describe data requirements of and between objects; and (5). means to describe data flows into, out of, and between objects.
(1). means for describing relationships between objects;
(2). means to decompose objects into greater levels of detail;
(3). means to describe properties of objects;
(4). means to describe data requirements of and between objects; and (5). means to describe data flows into, out of, and between objects.
5. The integrated system of claim 1 wherein the bridge subsystem comprises:
a. means for opening the output file of the user interface subsystem;
b. means for opening the input file of the process modelling application development subsystem;
c. means for determining the file contents of the user interface subsystem output file; and d. means for building application development subsystem compatible files and writing the application subsystem compatible files to the process modelling application development subsystem.
a. means for opening the output file of the user interface subsystem;
b. means for opening the input file of the process modelling application development subsystem;
c. means for determining the file contents of the user interface subsystem output file; and d. means for building application development subsystem compatible files and writing the application subsystem compatible files to the process modelling application development subsystem.
6. The integrated system of claim 5 wherein the bridge subsystem further comprises:
a. means to remove the software system delimiters and protocols inserted by the user interface subsystem; and b. means to concatenate token numbers to name data and property codes to support data.
a. means to remove the software system delimiters and protocols inserted by the user interface subsystem; and b. means to concatenate token numbers to name data and property codes to support data.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US81266791A | 1991-12-23 | 1991-12-23 | |
| US812,667 | 1991-12-23 |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2075315A1 true CA2075315A1 (en) | 1993-06-24 |
Family
ID=25210287
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA 2075315 Abandoned CA2075315A1 (en) | 1991-12-23 | 1992-08-05 | Integrated process modelling system with group decision support subsystem as input, modelling application development subsystem, and bridge subsystem therebetween |
Country Status (2)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| JP (1) | JPH05233245A (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2075315A1 (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US5930512A (en) * | 1996-10-18 | 1999-07-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for building and running workflow process models using a hypertext markup language |
-
1992
- 1992-08-05 CA CA 2075315 patent/CA2075315A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 1992-11-13 JP JP30416492A patent/JPH05233245A/en active Pending
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US5930512A (en) * | 1996-10-18 | 1999-07-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for building and running workflow process models using a hypertext markup language |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| JPH05233245A (en) | 1993-09-10 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US5587935A (en) | Integrated software development system including group decision support subsystem, application development subsystem, and bridge subsystem therebetween | |
| Bubenko | Extending the scope of information modelling | |
| EP3364295A1 (en) | Method and system for automatically generating functional architecture documents and documents for software design and analysis specification | |
| Michael et al. | IT service management frameworks compared–simplifying service portfolio management | |
| US7295957B2 (en) | Dynamic process management for the recording, modeling, documentation and validation of complex processes and systems | |
| Chung et al. | Matching, ranking, and selecting components: A cots-aware requirements engineering and software architecting approach | |
| Piattini et al. | A metric-based approach for predicting conceptual data models maintainability | |
| Reiner et al. | Project memory capture in globally distributed facility design | |
| Wegmann et al. | MDA in enterprise architecture? The living system theory to the rescue | |
| CA2075315A1 (en) | Integrated process modelling system with group decision support subsystem as input, modelling application development subsystem, and bridge subsystem therebetween | |
| Bui | Designing Multiple Criteria Negotiation Support Systems: Frameworks, Issues and Implementation | |
| US20020062353A1 (en) | Knowledge creation support and knowledge asset management system | |
| Epasinghe et al. | Open BIM adoption in Sri Lankan construction industry | |
| Dennis et al. | Automated support for business process re-engineering: a case study at IBM | |
| Nardello et al. | Process model automation for industry 4.0: Challenges for automated model generation based on laboratory experiments | |
| Huth et al. | Applying topic maps to ad hoc workflows for semantic associative navigation in process networks | |
| EP3977261A1 (en) | Process and system for automatic generation of functional architecture documents and software design and analysis specification documents from natural language | |
| Du et al. | Shared design thinking process model for supporting collaborative design | |
| Pollalis et al. | Towards the automation of conceptual design | |
| JPH05233244A (en) | Software development integration system with user interface, application developing tool and bridging mechanism between them | |
| Sundar | Software engineering | |
| Valentina et al. | Implementation of Electronic Technical Manuals and Content Management in Instrument-Making Enterprises | |
| Mustafa | An integrated hierarchical programming approach for industrial planning | |
| Abhishta et al. | Methodology for Evaluating the Appropriateness of a Business Process for Robotic Process Automation | |
| CN117172971A (en) | Big data legal supervision model building method based on legal supervision field modeling language |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| FZDE | Dead |