Team, have a question related to a reengineering model that I've used. The work I'm doing is proprietary, so I'm going to try to explain what I'm trying to do and then ask a couple of questions.
I have a Meta Model that is broken down into several horizontal swimlanes (Am using a EDPC to create the meta model, basically because it seems to give me the most flexibility). We're trying to build an "entry model" that is useful for executives that have been using a similar construct for many years.
Each of these swimlanes correlates with a "business system layer" definition we're using: business process, organization, application architecture, etc.
Playing off the "House" theme that ARIS uses, we're calling each of these horizontal lanes "Rooms". I'll use these three "Rooms" (Business Process, Organization, Application) to round out the description. We're describing these rooms as all the business elements that have to come together to provide value to a customer through a defined business process.
Within each of these rooms will either be what we're calling "Master Objects" (Organizational Objects, Architecture Objects, etc.) OR, we want to be able to group these Master Objects by dropping them in a another object (an activity or process object works), which we're calling a Library, that is basically a "grouping" box which establishes a simple connection between the Master Objects and the Library.
We are "cloning" these Master Objects down into detail process maps and connecting them appropriate to the process flow element (typically an activity), so that 1) updates can be made at the Meta Model Level and these updates will flow down into the detail maps and to 2) theorectically enhance analysis by leveraging these "closed loop relationships.
So here is what we're trying to do at 10,000 feet. . .
1. Use a Meta Model that has a Business Process with other Objects "mapped"/aligned to the Business Process. (Provides execs with a way to see, for example, how an application or an organization aligns with it's requisite process steps.)
2. We would create an assignment for a particular process step in the Meta Model to create a detailed process map.
3. We would "Connect" the Meta Model to the Detail maps by "Cloning" objects (a replicant) from the Meta Model into the process detail (for example an activity within a detailed process map that uses a particular application, the application would be "cloned"/replicated into the detail from the Meta Model and attached to the activity via a typical relationship line). [Cutting and pasteing is also faster and assures that the "inventory" of organizations and architecture objects are represented in in the detail maps by a visual check with the alignment on the Meta Map].
4. By assigning from the Major Process Steps and "Cloning" organizational and application objects into the detail of a particular process step, in theory, we would have a multi-layer closed set of models. The Major Process steps would be "connected" to the detail models by Assignment. The "Master Objects" would be connected to the process by cloning and attaching to where they are being utilized through an Activity. In theory, by making that connection at the detail level, the "cloned objects" (and hence the "Master Objects") are related to the process and to the Major Process steps by assignment - by definition a closed loop.
This structure came together, again, to support an engineering meta model that is already in use & with the thought that each object is like a database. If you can "connect"/relate these Objects the way I've described, that we might be able to do some interesting reporting. . .
For example: let's say that in the Architecture Room at the Meta Model Level, I have a Library called "Customer Facing Technology" to describe what applications have direct contact with the customer or with someone dealing with a customer. We would like to be able to do things such as select the " Customer Facing Technology" Library (which has connections to the all the applicaitons that have been placed in that library associated that are Customer Facing") and be able to easily report on for example, what organizational roles "touch" the application at the detailed process level for a couple of Meta Data Level Process Steps.
Using a database language, I can create a master database that mimics the Meta model, a series of small database that mimic the process level detail and a series of relationships that mimic what we've done by "cloning". I can run a report that mimics the report I described.
Given that ARIS is not a drawing tool, but a relational database with pictures, I should be able to do the same. Here come the questions . . .
Does establishing the relationships as I've described to get a "closed loop" multi-dimensional vidual database hold? Does it get me anything?
Is the reporting, by pointing and clicking on multiple Libraries or Libraries and objects or on multiple object types and then driving a report (ideally one that can be configured throught the report writer) doable?
Again, we're trying to create an environment that mimics something that is being used using a set of Visio drawings and a separate database environment (it works, but is kludgey) to answer business driven questions that need data to flow from the Meta Model across multiple detailed flows.
A more advanced report/query/analysis would be (given "years of experience" were established in a Master Role Object's parameters ), what is the required number of years experience in sales for different roles that touch different customer facing applications across all the project detail for the first and third major process steps in the Meta Data Model? I've got Architecture and Role Objects cloned down into the detail from the Meta Model. The detail maps have been assigned to each of the Major Process Steps on the Meta Model. To complete this, I would have a "Library" that included all the Role Objects at the Meta Model Level.
In theory, I would select (at the Meta Model Level): the "customer facing" Library to get all the releveant applicaitonst; the Library that contains all the roles; the first and third major steps. This would enable the particular relationships or Scope and then be able to query on role and years sales experience (both established parameters).
Comments/suggestions? Or did I totally confuse everyone?
