Towards an ontology for information systems development: A contextual approach

Contemporary Issues in Database Design and Information Systems Development

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1-36

  Leppänen, Maur ^a  

^a Univers ty of Jyväskylä ^*  (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67049112321     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-289-3.ch001     Document Type: Chapter

References (132)

1. Acuna, S., & Juristo, N. (2004). Assigning people to roles in software projects. Software-Practice and Experience, 34(7), 675-696.
2. Aoyama, M. (1993). Concurrent development process model. IEEE Software, 10(4), 46-55.
3. Baskerville, R. (1989). Logical controls specification: An approach to information systems security. In H. Klein & K. Kumar (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP Working Conference on Systems Development for Human Progress (pp. 241-255). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
4. Blum, B. (1994). A taxonomy of software development methods. Communications of the ACM, 37(11), 82-94.
5. Bodart, F., Flory, A., Leonard, M., Rochefeld, A., Rolland, C., & Tardieu, H. (1983). Evaluation of CRIS 1 I.S. development methods using a three cycles framework. In T. Olle, H. Sol, & C. Tully (Eds.), Information systems design methodologies: A feature analysis (pp. 191-206). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
6. Boehm, B. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer, 21(5), 61-72.
7. Brandt, I. (1983). A comparative study of information systems design methodologies. In T. Olle, H. Sol, & C. Tully (Eds.), Information systems design methodologies-A feature analysis (pp. 9-36). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
8. Brezillon, P., Pomerol, J.-Ch., & Saker I. (1998). Contextual and contextualized knowledge: An application in subway control. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 48(3), 357-373.
9. Brinkkemper, S. (1990). Formalization of information systems modeling. Unpublished dissertation thesis, University of Nijmegen, Amsterdam.
10. Burton-Jones, A., Storey, V., Sugumaran, V., & Ahluwalia, P. (2005). A semiotic metric suite for assessing the quality of ontologies. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 55(1), 84-102.
11. Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J., & Benjamins, R. (1999). What are ontologies, and why do we need them? IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14(1), 20-26.
12. Checkland, P. (1988). Information systems and system thinking: Time to unite? International Journal of Information Management, 8(4), 239-248.
13. Chung, L., Nixon, B., Yu, E., & Mylopoulos, J. (2000). Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Dordrecht: Kluwert.
14. Cimitile, A., & Visaggio, G. (1994). A formalism for structured planning of a software project. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 4(2), 277-300.
15. Clark, H., & Carlson, T. (1981). Context for comprehension. In J. Long, & A. Baddeley (Eds.), Attention and performance, IX (pp. 313-330). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Constantine, L. (1991). Building structured open teams to work. In Proceedings of Software Development '91. San Francisco: Miller-Freeman.
17. Couger, D., Higgins, L., & McIntyre, S. (1993). (Un)structured creativity in information systems organizations. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 375-397.
18. Curtis, B., & Kellner, M., & Over, J. (1992). Process modeling. Comm. of the ACM, 35(9), 75-90.
19. Cysneiros, L., Leite, J., & Neto, J. (2001). A framework for integrating non-functional requirements into conceptual models. Requirements Eng., 6(2), 97-115.
20. Davis, G. (1982). Strategies for information requirements determination. IBM Systems Journal, 21(1), 4-30.
21. Dowson, M. (1987). Iteration in the software process. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 36-39). New York: ACM Press,.
22. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
23. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge (pp. 19-38). UK: Cambridge University Pressx.
24. Falkenberg, E., Hesse, W., Lindgreen, P., Nilsson, B., Oei, J., Rolland, C., Stamper, R., van Asche, F., Verrijn-Stuart, A., & Voss, K. (1998). Frameworkof information system concepts. The Frisco Report (Web edition), IFIP.
25. Falkenberg, E., Nijjsen, G., Adams, A., Bradley, L., Bugeia, P., Campbell, A., Carkeet, M., Lehman, G., & Shoesmith, A. (1983). Feature analysis of ACM/PCM, CIAM, ISAC and NIAM. In T. Olle, H. Sol, & C. Tully (Eds.), Information systems design methodologies-A feature analysis (pp. 169-190). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
26. Fernandez-Lopez, M., Gomez-Perez, A., Pazos-Sierra, A., & Pazos-Sierra, J. (1999). Building a chemical ontology using METONTOLOGY and the ontology design environment. IEEE Intelligent Systems & Theory Applications, 4(1), 37-46.
27. Fife, D. (1987). How to know a well-organized software project when you find one. In R. Thayer (Ed.), Tutorial: Software engineering project management (pp. 268-276). Washington: IEEE Computer Society Press.
28. Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach, & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1-88). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
29. Finkelstein, A., Kramer, J., Nuseibeh, B., Finkelstein, L., & Goedicke, M. (1992). Viewpoints: A framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 1(2), 31-58.
30. Firesmith, D., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (1999). Improvements to the OPEN process Meta model. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, 12(7), 30-35.
31. Firesmith, D., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2002). The OPEN process framework. An introduction, Harlow: Addison-Wesley.
32. Franckson, M. (1994). The Euromethod deliverable model and its contributions to the objectives of Euromethod. In A. Verrijn-Stuart & T. Olle (Eds.), Methods and associated tools for the information systems life cycle (pp. 131-150). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
33. Glasson, B. (1989). Model of system evolution. Information and Software Technology, 31(7), 351-356.
34. Goldkuhl, G. (1991). Information systems design as argumentation-An investigation into design rationale as a conceptualization of design. In K. Ivanov (Ed.), Proceedings of the 14th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia (IRIS 1991), Umeå, Sweden.
35. Goldkuhl, G., & Röstling, A. (1988). Förändringsanalysi-arbetsmetodik och förhållningssätt för goda förändringsbelust. Lund: Studentlitterature.
36. Graham, I., Henderson-Sellers, B. & Younessi, H. (1997). The OPEN process specification. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
37. Grosz, G., Rolland, C., Schwer, S., Souveyet, C., Plihon, V., Si-Said, S., Achour, C., & Gnaho, C. (1997). Modelling and engineering the requirements engineering process: An overview of the NATURE approach. Requirements Engineering, 2(2), 115-131.
38. Gruber, T. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specification. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2), 119-220.
39. Gruber, T. (1995). Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43(5/6), 907-928.
40. Gupta, D., & Prakash, N. (2001). Engineering methods from method requirements specifications. Requirements Engineering, 6(3), 135-160.
41. Halliday, M. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of meaning. London: Edwards Arnold.
42. Harmsen, F. (1997). Situational method engineering. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, Moret, Ernst, & Young Management Consultants, The Netherlands.
43. Hazeyama, A., & Komiya S. (1993). Software process management system supporting the cooperation between manager and developers. In S. Brinkkemper, & F. Harmsen (Eds.), Proc. of the Fourth Workshop on the Next Generation of CASE Tools (pp. 183-188). Memoranda Informatica 93-32, University of Twente, The Netherlands
44. Henderson-Sellers, B., & Mellor, S. (1999). Tailoring process-focused OO methods. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, 12(4), 40-45.
45. Herbst, H. (1995). A meta model for business rules in systems analysis. In J. Iivari, K. Lyytinen, & M. Rossi (Eds.), Advanced information systems engineering (LNCS 932, pp. 186-199). Berlin: Springer.
46. Heym, M., & Österle, H. (1992). A reference model for information systems development. In K. Kendall, K. Lyytinen, & J. DeGross (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.2 Working Conference on the Impacts on Computer Supported Technologies on Information Systems Development (pp. 215-240). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
47. Hidding, G. (1997). Reinventing methodology: Who reads it and why? Comm. of the ACM, 40(11), 102-109.
48. Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. (1989). Four paradigms of information systems development. Comm. of the ACM, 32(10), 1199-1216.
49. Hirschheim, R., Klein, H., & Lyytinen, K. (1995). Information systems development-Conceptual and philosophical foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50. Hruby, P. (2000). Designing customizable methodologies. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, 13(8), 22-31.
51. IEEE (1990). Standard glossary of software engineering terminology. IEEE Standard 610.12-1990.
52. Iivari, J. (1989). Levels of abstraction as a conceptual framework for an information system. In E. Falkenberg & P. Lindgren (Eds.), Information system concepts: An in-depth analysis (pp. 323-352). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
53. Iivari, J. (1990). Hierarchical spiral model for information system and software development. Part 2: Design process. Information and Software Technology, 32(7), 450-458.
54. Iivari, J. (1991). A paradigmatic analysis of contemporary schools of IS development. European Journal of Information Systems, 1(4), 249-272.
55. Iivari, J., Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. (1998). A paradigmatic analysis of contrasting IS development approaches and methodologies. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 164-193.
56. Iivari, J., Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. (2001). A dynamic framework for classifying information systems development methodologies and approaches. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(3), 179-218.
57. Iivari, J., & Kerola, P. (1983). A sociocybernetic framework for the feature analysis of information systems design methodologies. In T. Olle, H. Sol, & C. Tully (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference on Feature Analysis of Information Systems Development Methodologies (pp. 87-139). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
58. Jacobson, I., Booch, G., & Rumbaugh, J. (1999). The unified software development process. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
59. Jarke, M., Jeusfeld, M., & Rose, T. (1990). A software process data model for knowledge engineering in information systems. Information Systems, 15(1), 85-116.
60. Jayaratna, N. (1994). Understanding and evaluating methodologies: NIMSAD-A systemic framework. London: McGraw-Hill.
61. Karam, G. & Casselman, R. (1993). A cataloging framework for software development methods. IEEE Computer, 26(2), 34-46.
62. Karlsson, F., & Ågerfalk, P. (2004). Method configuration: Adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Information and Software Technology, 46(9), 619-633.
63. Kavakli, V., & Loucopoulos, P. (1999). Goal-driven business process analysis application in electricity deregulation. Information Systems, 24(3), 187-207.
64. Kelly, J., & Sherif, Y. (1992). Comparison of four design methods for real-time software development. Information and Software Technology, 34(2), 76-82.
65. Kettinger, W., Teng, J., & Guha S. (1997). Business process change: A study of methodologies, techniques, and tools. MIS Quarterly, 21(1), 55-80.
66. Kishore, R., Zhang, H., & Ramesh, R. (2004). A Helix-Spindel model for ontological engineering. Comm. of the ACM, 47(2), 69-75.
67. Kitchenham, B., Travassos, H., von Mayrhauser, A., Nielssink, F., Schneiderwind, N., Singer, J., Takada, S., Vehvilainen, R., & Yang, H. (1999). Towards an ontology of software maintenance. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 11(6), 365-389.
68. Krogstie, J. (1995). Conceptual modeling for computerized information systems support in organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Trondheim, Norway.
69. Krogstie, J., & Sölvberg, A. (1996). A classification of methodological frameworks for computerized information systems support in organizations. In B. Brinkkemper, K. Lyytinen, & R. Welke (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 WG 8.1/8.2 Working Conference on Method Engineering: Principles of Method Construction and Tool Support (pp. 278-295). London: Chapman & Hall.
70. Kruchten, P. (2000). The rational unified process: An introduction. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
71. Kyng, M., & Mathiassen, L. (Eds.). (1997). Computers and design in context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Pressz.
72. Lang, M., & Duggan, J. (2001). A tool to support collaborative software requirements management. Requirements Engineering, 6(3), 161-172.
73. Lee, J., Xue, N.-L., & Kuo, J.-Y. (2001). Structuring requirement specifications with goals. Information and Software Technology, 43(2), 121-135.
74. Leont'ev, A. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
75. Leppänen, M. (2005a). An ontological framework and a methodical skeleton for method engineering. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä, Finland.
76. Leppänen, M. (2005b). A context-based enterprise ontology. In G. Guizzardi & G. Wagner (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Workshop on Vocabularies, Ontologies, and Rules for the Enterprise (VORTE'05), Enchede, The Netherlands (pp. 17-24).
77. Leppnen, M. (2005c). Conceptual analysis of current ME artifacts in terms of coverage: A contextual approach. In J. Ralyté, Per Ågerfalk, & N. Kraiem (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Situational Requirements Engineering Processes (SREP'05), Paris (pp. 75-90).
78. Leppnen, M. (2006). Contextual method integration. In Proceedings of the Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD 2006), Budapest, Hungary.
79. Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press.
80. Lin, C.-Y., & Ho, C.-S. (1999). Generating domain-specific methodical knowledge for requirements analysis based on methodology ontology. Information Sciences, 114(1-4), 127-164.
81. Loucopoulos, P., Kavakli, V., Prekas, N., Rolland, C., Grosz, G., & Nurcan, S. (1998). Using the EKD approach: The modelling component. ELEKTRA-Project No. 22927, ESPRIT Programme 7.1.
82. Louridas, P., & Loucopoulos, P. (1996). A framework for evaluating design rationale methods. In K. Siau & Y. Wand (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD'96).
83. Macauley, L. (1993). Requirements capture as a cooperative activity. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (pp. 174-181). IEEE Computer Science Press.
84. Maddison, R., Baker, G., Bhabuta, L., Fitzgerald, G., Hindle, K., Song, J., Stokes, N., & Wood, J. (1984). Feature analysis of five information system methodologies. In T. Bemelmans (Ed.), Beyond productivity: Information systems for organizational effectiveness (pp.277-306). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
85. Markus, M., & Björn-Andersen, L. (1987). Power over users: Its exercise by system professionals. Comm. of the ACM, 30(6), 498-504.
86. Mathiassen, L. (1998). Reflective systems development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 10(1/2), 67-117.
87. Moynihan, T. (1993). Modelling the software process in terms of the system representations and transformation steps used. Information and Software Technology, 35(3), 181-188.
88. Mylopoulos, J., Chung, L., Liao, S., & Wang, H. (2001). Exploring alternatives during requirements analysis. IEEE Software, 18(1), 92-96.
89. NATURE Team (1996). Defining visions in context: Models, processes, and tools for requirements engineering. Information Systems, 21(6), 515-547.
90. Nguyen, L., & Swatman, P. (2003). Managing the requirements engineering process. Requirements Engineering, 8(1), 55-68.
91. Nuseibeh, B., Finkelstein, A., & Kramer, J. (1996). Method engineering for multiperspective software development. Information and Software Technology, 38(4), 267-274.
92. Olle, T., Hagelstein, J., MacDonald, I., Rolland, C., Sol, H., van Assche, F., & Verrijn-Stuart, A. (1988). Information systems methodologies-A framework for understanding (2nd ed.). Reading: Addison-Wesley.
93. OMG. (2005). Software process engineering Meta model specification (Version 1.1). Object Management Group.
94. Pohl, K. (1993). The three dimensions of requirements engineering. In C. Rolland, F. Bodart, & C. Cauvet (Eds.), Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Advanced Info. Systems Engineering (CAiSE'93) (LNCS 685, pp. 275-292). Berlin: Springer.
95. Pohl, K. (1994). The three dimensions of requirements engineering: A framework and its application. Information Systems, 19(3), 243-258.
96. Pohl, K., Dömges, R., & Jarke, M. (1997). Towards method-driven trace capture. In A. Olive & J. Pastor (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'97) (pp. 103-116). Berlin: Springer.
97. Punter, T., & Lemmen, K. (1996). The MEMA-model: Towards a new approach for methods engineering. Journal of Information and Software Technology, 38(4), 295-305.
98. Ramesh, B., & Jarke, M. (2001). Towards reference models for requirements traceability. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 27(1), 58-93.
99. Rettig, M., & Simons, G. (1993). A project planning and development process for small teams. Comm. of the ACM, 36(10), 45-55.
100. Robey, D. (1984). Conflict models for implementation research. In R. Schultz (Ed.), Management science implementation. New York: American Elsevier.
101. Rolland, R., Souveyet, C., & Ben Achour, C. (1998). Guiding goal modeling using scenarios. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 24(12), 1055-1071.
102. Rolland, C., Souveyet, C., & Moreno, M. (1995). An approach for defining ways-of-working. Information Systems, 20(4), 337-359.
103. Rose, T., & Jarke, M. (1990). A decision-based configuration process model. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 316-325). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press.
104. Ruiz, F., Vizcaino, A., Piattini, M., & Garcia, F. (2004). An ontology for the management of software maintenance projects. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 14(3), 323-349.
105. Rzevski, G. (1983). On the comparison of design methodologies. In T. Olle, H. Sol, & C. Tully (Eds.), Information systems design methodologies-A feature analysis (pp. 259-266). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
106. Sabherwal, R., & Robey, D. (1993). An empirical taxonomy of implementation processes based on sequences of events in information system development. Organization Science, 4(4), 548-576.
107. Sabherwal, R., & Robey, D. (1995). Reconciling variance and process strategies for studying information system development. Information Systems Research, 6(4), 303-327
108. Saeki, M., Iguchi, K., Wen-yin, K., & Shinokara M. (1993). A meta model for representing software specification & design methods. In N. Prakash, C. Rolland, & B. Pernici (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on Information Systems Development Process (pp. 149-166). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
109. Short, K. (1991). Methodology integration: Evolution of information engineering. Information and Software Technology, 33(9), 720-732.
110. Slooten van, K., & Brinkkemper, S. (1993). A method engineering approach to information systems development. In N. Prakash, C. Rolland, & B. Pernici (Eds.), Proceedings of the IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on Information Systems Development Process (pp. 167-188). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
111. Sol, H. (1992). Information systems development: A problem solving approach. In W. Cotterman & J. Senn (Eds.), Challenges and strategies for research in systems development (pp. 151-161). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
112. Sommerville, I. (1998). Software engineering (5th ed.). Reading: Addison-Wesley Longman.
113. Söderström, E., Andersson, B., Johannesson, P., Perjons, E., & Wangler, B. (2002). Towards a framework for comparing process modeling languages. In A. Banks Pidduck, J. Mylopoulos, C. Woo, & T. Ozsu (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE 2002) (pp. 600-611). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
114. Song, X., & Osterweil, L. (1992). Towards objective, systematic design-method comparison. IEEE Software, 9(3), 43-53.
115. Sowa, J. (2000). Knowledge representation-Logical, philosophical, and computational foundations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
116. Sowa, J., & Zachman J. (1992). Extending and formalizing the framework for information system architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 31(3), 590-616.
117. Staab, S., Schnurr, H.P., Studer, R., & Sure, Y. (2001). Knowledge processes and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(1), 26-34.
118. Stamper, R. (1975). Information science for systems analysis. In E. Mumford & H. Sackman (Eds.), Human choice and computers (pp. 107-120). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
119. Stamper, R. (1992). Signs, organizations, norms and information systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd Australian Conference on Information Systems (pp. 21-65). Department of Business Systems, Univ. of Wollongong, Australia.
120. Swede van, V., & van Vliet, J. (1993). A flexible framework for contingent information systems modeling. Information and Software Technology, 35(9), 530-548.
121. Thayer, R. (1987). Software engineering project management-A top-down view. In R. Thayer (Ed.), Tutorial: Software engineering project management (pp. 15-56). IEEE Computer Society Press.
122. Uschold, M. (1996). Building ontologies: Towards a unified methodology. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the British Computer Society Specialist Group on Expert Systems, Cambridge, UK.
123. Uschold, M., & King, M. (1995). Towards a methodology for building ontologies. In Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, Montreal, Canada.
124. Vessey, I., & Conger, S. (1994). Requirements specification: Learning object, process, and data methodologies. Comm. of the ACM, 37(5), 102-113.
125. Wand, Y., & Weber, R. (1990). An ontological model of an information system. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 16(11), 1282-1292.
126. Webster (1989). Webster's encyclopedic unabridged dictionary of the English language. New York: Gramercy Books.
127. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. CA: Sage Publications.
128. Weinberger, H., Te'eni, D., & Frank, A. (2003). Ontologies of organizational memory as a basis for evaluation. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference of Information Systems, Naples, Italy.
129. Wild, C., Maly, K., & Liu, L. (1991). Decision-based software development. Software maintenance: Research and practice, 3(1), 17-43.
130. Wood-Harper, A., & Fitzgerald, G. (1982). A taxonomy of current approaches to systems analysis. The Computer Journal, 25(1), 12-16.
131. Zachman, J. (1987). A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 26(3), 276-292.
132. Zultner, R. (1993). TQM for technical teams. Comm. of the ACM, 36(10), 79-91.