<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>From Strategy to Code: A Model-Driven Software Production Method ???</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Universitat Politecnica de Valencia</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Valencia</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Spain rnoel@pros.upv.es</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Escuela de Ingenier a Informatica, Universidad de Valpara so</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Valpara so</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="CL">Chile</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>79</fpage>
      <lpage>88</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Model-driven development aims to produce software from computation-independent and platform-independent models that capture domain knowledge. A key knowledge area is business strategy, which impacts the strategic division of business domains, and so on the strategic design of software products. Moreover, agile organisations continuously change their business strategy, a ecting multiple software products at the same time. While goal modelling and enterprise architecture initiatives have aimed to align business strategy and information systems, the lack of well-de ned modelling procedures and speci c business strategy constructs hinder their integration in a model-driven development context. This thesis addresses the design of a model-driven software production method that integrates business strategy knowledge to provide traceability and as much automation as possible from strategic elements to business-driven, modular, and executable models of the information system. Using the design science methodology, the expected contributions are the design of a low-complexity and systematic business strategy modelling method, and a transformation technique to map business strategy knowledge into an existing software production method.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Model-Driven Development</kwd>
        <kwd>Business Strategy Modelling</kwd>
        <kwd>Organisational Modelling</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Model-driven development focuses on the generation of working software from
computation-independent and platform-independent models, that capture
domain knowledge that a ects functional and non-functional aspects of the
software product. Nowadays, business strategy, in particular the top-level de nition
of the organisational goals and the means to achieve them [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
        ], is a key knowledge
area that a ects software products.
      </p>
      <p>
        Agile organisations need to continuously adapt their business strategy to
external in uences [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ], a ecting multiple business-enabling information systems
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>
        ]. In this adaptive context, Agile organisations tackle the challenge of
aligning IT and Strategy by clustering their structure around business outcomes, and
hence, de ning business sub-domains that are developed by small,
multidisciplinary organisation units (also known as agile cells or squads). This business
sub-domains are mirrored into the high level design of the supporting
information systems and services. Design approaches such as Domain Driven Design
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ] foster an strategic design of the system, by dividing existing broad system
domains into strategy-aligned sub-domains, with clearly de ned bounds and
interrelationships. These logical divisions have practical consequences in terms of
how software components are designed and implemented [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20 ref8">8, 20</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Hence, top-level strategic knowledge has a key role in modern software development, and it is valuable to be considered in a modeldriven software production method.</title>
      <p>
        Two main approaches for aligning strategy and information systems have
been addressed by the conceptual modelling community: enterprise architecture
(EA) and goal modelling. On the one hand, EA frameworks have proposed a
multi-layer approach to integrate business, information, application, and
technology infrastructure knowledge, to enable the enterprise strategy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ]. However,
modelling complexity in EA is high (e.g., more than 74 constructs in TOGAF
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>
        ]), and requires a challenging organisational e ort. On the other hand, goal
modelling frameworks such as i* and KAOS [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34 ref4">34, 4</xref>
        ] allow the representation and
analysis of interrelated goals from di erent systems' stakeholders in the early
requirements stage, from which functional and non-functional requirements are
derived. However, these approaches concern stakeholders' intentions that might
be di erent from organisations' intentions (or business motivation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>
        ]).
Nonetheless, i* has been also applied for organisational change analysis [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>
        ], extensions
for organisational modelling have been proposed [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ], and has been considered
for adding intentionality to EA and business process models [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15 ref2 ref35">35, 2, 15</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        From the above initiatives, i* presents a unique characteristic that allows
capturing strategic information in the context of agile organisations: it allows
to de ne both strategic intentional elements along with organisation units and
roles. However, there are two characteristics that could threaten its integration
in a model-driven development context. Firstly, i* lacks some business strategy
constructs [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ], which could harm its taxonomic independence [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ] (i.e., it must
be complemented with other languages). Secondly, i* does not prescribe a
modelling procedure, which prevents i* models from having de ned and repeatable
outcomes [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ], that are needed to design the integration points for using modelling
languages in combination [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The goal of this thesis is to integrate business strategy into a software
production method, that already considers requirements and information system
modelling and code generation, to support the strategic alignment of the
gen</p>
      <p>
        From Strategy to Code: A Model-Driven Software Production Method 81
erated software components. The problem is addressed with the design science
methodology [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>
        ], and the main expected contributions are 1. A systematic,
low-complexity modelling method for business strategy, and 2. A
transformation technique to map business strategy knowledge into the existing software
production method, to support model-driven strategic software design.
      </p>
      <p>The rest of the article presents the background and related solutions (Section
2), the research de nition (Section 3), the research methodology (Section 4), the
current status (Section 5), and the conclusions (Section 6).
2</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Background and Related Work</title>
        <p>The thesis is based on (but not constrained to) an existing software production
method that goes from requirements to code (R2C), presented in the background
section. This R2C method will allow the empirical veri cation of the e ects of
mapping business strategy to business process models, to system models, and to
automatically generated software products. In the related works section, some
existing initiatives on representing business strategy are reviewed.
2.1</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Background</title>
      <p>
        The existing R2C software production method on which the thesis will be based
supports goal modelling with the i* [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>
        ] framework, business process
modelling with the Communication Analysis method (CA) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ], and system modelling
with the OO-Method (OOM) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ]. These initiatives have been integrated using
ontologically-aligned transformation techniques: GoBIS [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>
        ] for i* to CA
integration and the proposal of Espan~a [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] for CA to OOM integration. OOM's tool
support, INTEGRANOVA [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ] can compile OOM models and, by specifying
platform-speci c requirements, generate fully functional software systems.
      </p>
      <p>
        I* [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>
        ] is a social modelling framework. Its main construct is social
dependency among social, intentional agents to achieve their goals. I* supports the
de nition of four types of dependencies (goals, soft goals, tasks, and resources),
and the description of the inner strategic elements of each social agent, which
are needed to satisfy their dependencies. These modelling constructs allow the
analysis of di erent con gurations of strategic elements for goal satisfaction, in
what is known as the early requirements stage.
      </p>
      <p>
        GoBIS [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>
        ] is a transformation technique that allows mapping goal model
elements into business process model elements. Its main premise is that social
dependency between two actors can be mapped into business-process level
interactions between these actors to interchange the information needed for satisfying
the dependency. CA is a requirements speci cation method, which allows
business process modelling from a communication perspective. Communicative Event
Diagrams graphically depict the sequence of interactions between actors, namely
Communication Events (CE). CEs can be speci ed following a structured and
theoretically supported template. The information interchanged by the actors is
speci ed through Message Structures (MS).
      </p>
      <p>
        Following the guidelines proposed by Espan~a [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ], it is possible to
transform CA models into the model elements of the information system. This
semiautomated technique maps the communication content and the communicative
interactions ow into the structural, behavioural, and functional models of the
information system. These models are part of OOM [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ]. OOM is an automatic
software production method from a platform-independent conceptual schema of
the information system. Besides the above-mentioned models, OOM also
considers user interface models, which are conceptually wired to the other models.
OOM models can be compiled to generate platform-speci c software.
      </p>
      <p>
        The existing R2C method deals with the conceptual model of the system
(OOM), the requirements model (CA), and the purpose models (CA and i*).
On top of that, at the organisational modelling level, business strategy drives
the organisation structure and IT infrastructure design [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>
        ]. The business
strategy considers the de nition of strategic goals and the high-level guidelines for
its implementation and measurement. In this proposal, it is emphasised the
necessity of including the organisation structure and roles at the strategic level, to
serve as sca olding both for business process modelling and for the high-level
design of the supporting software systems, in the context of agile organisations.
2.2
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        Several initiatives have applied i* for modelling business strategy de nitions at
the organisational level. Yu et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref35">35</xref>
        ] propose the integration of Business
Motivation Model (BMM) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>
        ] and i* to the EA construction process. In the context
of complex decision-making, the integration of EA and goal modelling has been
considered by Barat et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] to allow the identi cation, modelling, and
analysis of relevant information of organisational structure, goals, and operational
processes. Johannesson [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ] has proposed a step-by-step method to connect a
new model, the business (or value) model, with i* goal models and with business
process models; each step of the whole method speci es what must be modelled,
but does not provide speci c guidelines on how to do it. While these proposals
consider integrating i* with business strategy concepts such as strategies,
tactics, goals, and objectives, they do not specify a systematic modelling procedure.
Besides the application of the original version of i* for organisational modelling,
there have been several extension proposals, reported in the systematic review
presented by Goncalves et al. in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]. Up to 17 initiatives were found under the
organisational/business modelling application category, however, none of these
extensions provide the business strategy constructs reported in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>In summary, the above works account for widespread (although disjointed)
e orts to use i* to face the modelling of organisational strategy. However, no
speci c guidelines towards its application and no extensions allowing to model
speci cally business strategy were found.</p>
      <p>
        Another approach for the integration of high-level business de nitions and
software development consists of integrating enterprise modelling (EM) and
model-driven development (MDD) at a higher abstraction level. Zikra et al.
present in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref37">37</xref>
        ] a metamodel that connects enterprise models with requirements
      </p>
      <p>
        From Strategy to Code: A Model-Driven Software Production Method 83
models which are then used to derive information system models. Among other
applications, the metamodel is applied to system integration [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref36">36</xref>
        ] from a
communicative interaction perspective [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. While these proposals provide strong support
for integrating EM and MDD models, they are not materialized in speci c
modelling guidelines and tools regarding business strategy. Moreover, these works do
not consider the organizational structure in EM, which is arguably one of the
key elements in agile organisations strategy.
3
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Research De nition</title>
        <p>The research addresses a design problem, in the context of model-driven
engineering of information systems. The improvement goal is to integrate business
strategy knowledge into a model-driven software production method,
in order to provide traceability and as much automation as possible
from strategic elements to business-driven, modular, and executable
models of the information system. Although the research is contextualized
to the speci c R2C method presented in Section 2.1, the expected contributions
are valuable for other model-driven methods that consider business process
modelling and/or goal modelling. The speci c research objectives (RO) are:
{ RO1: Identify modelling and transformation problems for the integration of
business strategy in the current R2C software production method.
{ RO2: Design a business strategy modelling method based on existing goal
and enterprise architecture modelling frameworks.
{ RO3: Design a transformation technique from business strategy to the
existing R2C software production method.
{ RO4: Empirically validate the outcomes of RO2 and RO3.</p>
        <p>The e ects of both the business strategy method and the whole S2C software
production method will be assessed by testing the following hypotheses:
{ Hq: The models produced with the proposed method have better quality
than the produced by the existing R2C method.
{ He: The modelling process with the proposed method is more e cient than
the existing R2C method.
{ Hus: The modelling process with the proposed method is more satisfying for
modellers than the existing R2C method.</p>
        <p>
          Hq must be speci ed in operative hypotheses to tackle (1) whether the
proposed modelling method better represents strategic knowledge than the goal
models considered in the current R2C method, and (2) whether the
integration of strategic knowledge improves traceability, modularity, scalability, and
maintainability of the models produced in the business process and information
system modelling stages of the current R2C method. To test He, the modelling
e ort needed by the modellers will be measured, and Hus will be tested by
measuring modellers' intention to use, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of
use, using Moody's Model Evaluation Method [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
          ].
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Research Methodology</title>
        <p>
          The research methodology is design science (DS) for information systems,
specifically the process proposed by Wieringa [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>
          ]. DS guides the design and
investigation of artifacts in a context. The social context is Agile Organisations [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
          ]
and the knowledge context is Model-Driven Development. The artifact is the
"Strategy-to-Code" (S2C) software production method, which is the extension
of the existing R2C method to include business strategy knowledge. The thesis
covers three of the ve stages of DS's engineering cycle: problem investigation,
treatment design, and treatment validation, leaving the implementation of the
treatment (i.e., its transference to a real-world context) and its evaluation out
of the scope. The DS stages considered in this thesis are described below.
4.1
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Problem Investigation</title>
      <p>This stage addresses the RO1, regarding the knowledge question of what are the
problems to model and transform business strategy knowledge into an existing
R2C method. The main contribution of this stage is the identi cation of the
problems to model and transform business strategy knowledge with
the existing goal and business process modelling methods.</p>
      <p>
        The approach for this stage is to describe the state of the art of both the
existing R2C method and business strategy modelling, as well as its integration
with requirement models. A literature review on business strategy modelling,
strategy, and IT alignment, and integration of intentionality to business models
will be conducted. Then, a mechanism experiment [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>
        ] will be performed to
expose and analyse the modelling and transformation problems in the current
R2C method regarding the inclusion of strategic knowledge. In the experiment,
a modelling case is designed to show whether the strategic de nitions can not
be successfully modelled with the current method and whether the strategic
information is lost through the transformations. The expected scienti c results of
this stage are technical reports regarding the state of the art, a workshop paper
presenting the strategy-to-code approach and the lab demo, and a conference
paper for the business strategy modelling and transformation problems.
4.2
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Treatment Design</title>
      <p>
        This stage addresses the design of the treatment, towards two main
contributions: the design of a business strategy modelling method (RO2) and
the design of the integration with the existing R2C method (RO3).
Regarding RO2, the modelling and transformation problems identi ed in the
previous stage serve as requirements for the design process, which will follow
the Situational Method Engineering [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ] methodology. The design of the
modelling method considers the modelling language, the modelling procedure, and
mechanisms [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]. The design of the modelling language and procedure will be
tackled as an adaptation from the strategic constructs and relationships from
existing EA and goal modelling languages, while the mechanisms will deal with
      </p>
      <p>
        From Strategy to Code: A Model-Driven Software Production Method 85
the integrity checking of the designed models. The approach is to generate a
rst version of the method by selecting constructs related to business strategy
from existing modelling languages, and then re ne it through empirical
activities (below detailed in Treatment Validation). The tool support is meant to be
implemented in an open and relevant model-driven environment [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ], to reinforce
the visibility of the approach and to foster the evolution of the method under
an agile method engineering approach [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Regarding RO3, the approach is twofold: (1) mapping strategic business
concepts into relevant strategic software design elements and (2) connecting business
motivation with business process models. Concerning (1), the hypothesis is that
an organisational unit can be mapped into an independent conceptual model
of the information system (a bounded context with a ubiquitous language,
using the terminology of Domain-Driven Design (DDD) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]), and the relationships
among units are mapped into the integration dependencies among the
conceptual models (or context maps using the DDD terminology). Regarding (2), the
proposal exploits previous works of the research group, mapping organisational
goals as the context for business processes [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>
        ] and mapping goal
dependencies between actors as interactions in business process models [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>
        ]. The design
goals for the above initiatives are business-driven maintainability, modularity,
scalability, and traceability of the generated software components. The design
method will be ontological pivoting [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ], thus, using a reference ontology to map
source and target metamodels. The integration of modelling languages will be
guided by the quality metrics presented by Giraldo et al. in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. The expected
scienti c results are conference papers regarding the design of the method and
the transformation, and speci c book chapters regarding the implementation of
the method and the transformation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
4.3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>Treatment Validation</title>
      <p>This stage addresses the validation of the designs through empirical DS cycles
(RO4), in order to test the research hypotheses. The main contributions of this
stage are empirical evidence of the quality, e ciency, and modellers'
satisfaction of the proposed business-strategy modelling method and
empirical evidence of the quality, e ciency, and modellers' satisfaction
of the strategy-to-code software production method.</p>
      <p>
        Regarding the rst contribution, the approach is to conduct an initial
experiment to validate that it is worth considering a speci c business strategy
method than to model business strategy with i* (which is already considered in
the R2C method). The design of the experimental comparison between the
proposal and i* will follow the guidelines by Wohlin et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>
        ]. A second experiment
will address the precision and recall for representing business strategy elements
of the proposed method, as well as the modellers' e ciency and satisfaction.
Regarding the assessment of the whole S2C method, a theoretical validation of
the whole S2C method to demonstrate its semantic consistency is considered.
Also, a case study of a real-world problem will be performed, to evaluate the
effects of the method over maintainablity, modularity, scalability, and traceability;
these elements will be assessed by experts in model-driven and traditional
software development. The case study will be designed following the guidelines by
Runeson and Host [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>
        ]. Finally, an experiment for comparing the proposed S2C
method with the existing R2C method will be performed, measuring the above
quality attributes and also modellers' e ciency and satisfaction. The expected
scienti c products of this stage are a conference paper regarding the case study,
and journal papers concerning the experiments.
5
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-7-1">
        <title>Current Status</title>
        <p>
          Regarding the problem investigation (RO1), some ndings have been partially
presented in this proposal (for instance, the lack of constructs and modelling
procedure of i*, that hinder its use for the purpose of the improvement goal of
the research project). A workshop article that introduced the strategy-to-code
approach with a lab demo has been recently published [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
          ], and a conference
article regarding the experiment mechanism analysis has been submitted.
        </p>
        <p>
          Concerning the business strategy modelling method design (RO2), an initial
version of the business strategy modelling method has been designed. The
proposed language considers constructs and relationships from i* [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>
          ], TOGAF [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>
          ],
and BMM [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>
          ], and a modelling procedure consistent with the business strategy
vision of Agile Organisations [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ]. A book chapter describing the method and
its implementation in the OMiLAB environment [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ] has been submitted, and a
conference article is being prepared to report the detailed design of the method.
Regarding the empirical validation (RO4), an initial experiment was performed,
considering 28 undergraduate students using i* and the proposed method for
representing a business strategy problem. Initial results suggest signi cant
improvements regarding the accuracy and the completeness in capturing strategic
knowledge. Current work is focused on the improvement of the method,
considering the results collected in the experimental trials. The expected results by the
end of the second year are the design and implementation of the transformation
of business strategy to business process models (RO3). During the rst half of
the nal year of the program, the assessment of the overall method through case
studies and experiments will be performed (RO4).
6
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-7-2">
        <title>Conclusions</title>
        <p>Adaptive, continuously-changing business strategy has a great impact over the
strategic design of software products and hence, it is valuable to be considered
in model-driven software production methods. This research proposal addresses
the design problem of integrating business strategy into an existing software
production method, that already considers requirements and system modelling,
and automatically generates working software systems. The main expected
contributions are a systematic and low-complexity modelling method for business
strategy and a transformation technique that allows the integration of
strategic elements to generate business-aligned and modular software products. The</p>
        <p>From Strategy to Code: A Model-Driven Software Production Method 87
research objectives are the problem investigation, the design of the business
strategy modelling method and its integration in the existing R2C method, and
the generation of empirical evidence of the e ects of the proposals. These
objectives are addressed in three research stages by using speci c design and research
methods. To date, problem investigation has been nished, and a rst version of
the business strategy modelling method has been proposed and experimentally
evaluated. Challenging aspects of the proposed research are the concise
representation of business strategy suitable for the agile organisations context, and the
transformation of strategic knowledge into strategic software design knowledge.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Aghina</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ahlback</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.:
          <article-title>The ve trademarks of agile organizations</article-title>
          .
          <source>McKinsey &amp; Company</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          ), https://www.mckinsey.com/businessfunctions/organization/our-insights/the- ve
          <article-title>-trademarks-of-agile-organizations</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barat</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kulkarni</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Clark</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barn</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A method for e ective use of enterprise modelling techniques in complex dynamic decision making</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>319</volume>
          {
          <fpage>330</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bork</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Buchmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karagiannis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Miron</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>An open platform for modeling method conceptualization: The omilab digital ecosystem</article-title>
          .
          <source>Communications of the Association for Information Systems</source>
          <volume>44</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <volume>32</volume>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dardenne</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Van Lamsweerde</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fickas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Goal-directed requirements acquisition</article-title>
          .
          <source>Science of computer programming 20(1-2)</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          {
          <fpage>50</fpage>
          (
          <year>1993</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5. Espan~a,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Gonzalez</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>O.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Communication analysis: a requirements engineering method for information systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>530</volume>
          {
          <fpage>545</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Espan</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>~a Cubillo, S.: Methodological integration of Communication Analysis into a model-driven software development framework</article-title>
          .
          <source>Ph.D. thesis</source>
          , Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Estrada</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rebollar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mylopoulos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An empirical evaluation of the i* framework in a model-based software generation environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>513</volume>
          {
          <fpage>527</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Evans</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Evans</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Domain-driven design: tackling complexity in the heart of software</article-title>
          . Addison-Wesley
          <string-name>
            <surname>Professional</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giachetti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Valverde</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mar n</surname>
          </string-name>
          , B.:
          <article-title>Interoperability for model-driven development: Current state and future challenges</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: 2012 Sixth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS)</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>1</volume>
          {
          <fpage>10</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>IEEE</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giraldo-Velasquez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Espan~a Cubillo,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Giraldo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>W.J.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Pastor</given-names>
            <surname>Lopez</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>O.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Evaluating the quality of a set of modelling languages used in combination: A method and a tool</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Systems</source>
          <volume>77</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>48</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>70</fpage>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goncalves</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Castro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Araujo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Heineck</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A systematic literature review of istar extensions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Systems and Software 137</source>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          {
          <fpage>33</fpage>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Henderson-Sellers</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ralyte</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Agerfalk</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rossi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Situational method engineering. Springer (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Holbeche</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The Agile Organization: How to build an engaged, innovative and resilient business</article-title>
          . Kogan Page Publishers (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>14. Integranova: Integranova Software Solutions, http://www.integranova.com/es/</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Johannesson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The role of business models in enterprise modelling</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Conceptual modelling in information systems engineering</source>
          , pp.
          <volume>123</volume>
          {
          <fpage>140</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karagiannis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Agile modeling method engineering</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 19th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>5</volume>
          {
          <issue>10</issue>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karagiannis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Kuhn, H.:
          <article-title>Metamodelling platforms</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Conference on Electronic Commerce and Web Technologies</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>182</volume>
          {
          <fpage>182</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kitsios</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kamariotou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Business strategy modelling based on enterprise architecture: a state of the art review</article-title>
          .
          <source>Business Process Management Journal</source>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lapalme</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Three schools of thought on enterprise architecture</article-title>
          .
          <source>IT professional 14(6)</source>
          ,
          <volume>37</volume>
          {
          <fpage>43</fpage>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lewis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fowler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Microservices: a de nition of this new architectural term</article-title>
          .
          <source>MartinFowler. com 25</source>
          ,
          <volume>14</volume>
          {
          <fpage>26</fpage>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mintzberg</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ghoshal</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lampel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Quinn</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The strategy process: concepts, contexts, cases</article-title>
          . Pearson education (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22. Moody, D.L.:
          <article-title>The method evaluation model: a theoretical model for validating information systems design methods</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: European Conference on Information Systems</source>
          <year>2003</year>
          . pp.
          <volume>1</volume>
          {
          <issue>17</issue>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Noel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Panach</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A models-to-program information systems engineering method</article-title>
          . In: Modelling to Program International Workshop. p.
          <volume>162</volume>
          (
          <year>2021</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Molina</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Model-driven architecture in practice: a software production environment based on conceptual modeling</article-title>
          . Springer (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ruiz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Costal</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Espan~a,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Franch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>O.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Gobis: An integrated framework to analyse the goal and business process perspectives in information systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Systems</source>
          <volume>53</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>330</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>345</fpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Runeson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Host, M.:
          <article-title>Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering</article-title>
          .
          <source>Empirical software engineering 14(2)</source>
          ,
          <volume>131</volume>
          {
          <fpage>164</fpage>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scaled</surname>
            <given-names>Agile</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>INC: Safe 5 for lean enterprises</article-title>
          . https://www.scaledagileframework.com/, (Accessed on 04/10/2021)
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation>
          28. The Object Management Group:
          <article-title>Business motivation model speci cation version 1</article-title>
          .3, https://www.omg.org/spec/BMM/About-BMM/, (Accessed on 04/10/2021)
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation>
          29. The Open Group:
          <article-title>The togaf® standard, version 9.2</article-title>
          . https://publications.opengroup.org/c182, (Accessed on 11/09/2020)
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref30">
        <mixed-citation>
          30.
          <string-name>
            <surname>de la Vara</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sanchez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pastor</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Business process modelling and purpose analysis for requirements analysis of information systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>213</volume>
          {
          <fpage>227</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref31">
        <mixed-citation>
          31.
          <string-name>
            <surname>De la Vara Gonzalez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Diaz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Business process-driven requirements engineering: a goal-based approach</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 8th workshop on business process modeling</source>
          . p.
          <fpage>15</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>Citeseer</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref32">
        <mixed-citation>
          32.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wieringa</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.J.:
          <article-title>Design science methodology for information systems</article-title>
          and software engineering. Springer (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref33">
        <mixed-citation>
          33.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wohlin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Runeson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Host,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Ohlsson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.C.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Regnell</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Wesslen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>A.</surname>
          </string-name>
          : Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref34">
        <mixed-citation>
          34.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Modeling strategic relationships for process reengineering</article-title>
          .
          <source>Social Modeling for Requirements Engineering</source>
          <volume>11</volume>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          ),
          <volume>66</volume>
          {
          <fpage>87</fpage>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref35">
        <mixed-citation>
          35.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Strohmaier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Deng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Exploring intentional modeling and analysis for enterprise architecture</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: 2006 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW'06)</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>32</volume>
          {
          <fpage>32</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>IEEE</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref36">
        <mixed-citation>
          36.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zikra</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The communicative nature of information systems integration as an enabler for business it alignment</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Conference on Business Information Systems</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>136</volume>
          {
          <fpage>147</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref37">
        <mixed-citation>
          37.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zikra</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stirna</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zdravkovic</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Bringing enterprise modeling closer to modeldriven development</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>268</volume>
          {
          <fpage>282</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>