Adaptive Complex Enterprise Framework: Ontology, Modeling, Co-Engineering Principles, Work Products

Adaptive Complex Enterprise Framework: Ontology, Modeling, Co-Engineering Principles, Work Products

Jay Ramanathan, Rajiv Ramnath
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60566-276-3.ch002
(Individual Chapters)
No Current Special Offers


The ACE structure for coordination across various services using policies to meet overall goals is presented here. The more detailed depiction of the ACE structure in Figure 1 represents further details than in Figure 2, Chapter I. The structure includes the 1) BioS Stakeholders and Dimension, 2) the goal states of their interest, and 3) Agent Interactions that achieve those goal states. The Goal achievements are aggregated for continual improvement and used in decision-making to finetune Interactions. These underlying details are developed based on framework parts presented here. They include 1) Interaction ontology, 2) Modeling notation, 3) Principles for analysis, and 4) Work Products and their use in the continuous improvement. The result is goal-oriented ACE management by objectives at all BioS dimensions as we shall see.
Chapter Preview


How can we conceptualize the performance of value-producing Interactions within dynamic and changing organizations?

  • How do we conceptualize the goals of BioS stakeholders and take actions to ensure value is delivered?

  • What is the basic Interaction ontology that defines the points of measurement and service value-add to BioS stakeholders?

  • How do we treat shared resources and identify related efficiencies?

  • How does it allow us to achieve service planning-to-execution performance traceability?

What modeling notation represents the complex enterprise so that teams can define and visualize important Agent Interactions and their contribution to the organization?

  • What is the notation for creating the structure that allows us to view any organization uniformly as Interactions executed by Agents that contribute value to BioS stakeholders (refer to Figure 3, Chapter 1)?

  • How does it help us align and improve our achievement of BioS goals?

  • How do we use the ACE representation to structure and attain maturity levels?

What principles for analysis can be applied to the ACE structure for concurrent and continuous performance improvement?

  • What are the principles that align the BioS perspectives?

  • How can we apply business and systems engineering principles for effectiveness?

  • How do we develop appropriate representations for this purpose?

  • How can we begin to identify, evaluate, and prioritize different options for continuous improvement?

What are the work products resulting from an ACE representation and the application of the principles?

  • What range of enterprise architecture work products is needed to contribute to a precise understanding for effective governance of a complex system?

  • How do we use the work products to implement and relate best practices for continuous improvement and facilitate more dynamic adaptation strategies?

In the previous chapter we conceptualized ACE as being made up of one or more service BioS that shared some Agents (Figure 3, Chapter I). The BioS nodes in the cycle are in reality goals to be achieved and cause-and-effect relationships among the BioS goals. The BioS nodes or dimensions are each made up of additional information such as - stakeholders, Interactions, and goals. To represent all this more easily, we view BioS as a vertical or internal value chain as shown below. (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3)

Figure 3.

A: Interaction between input/output artifacts, BioS goals, and roles. B: Illustration of an ACE structure with two interactions during a Pit Stop. C: Illustration of use of the traceability pipe to represent and achieve greater agility during the Pit Stop.

Figure 1.

Prototypical ACE structure with vertical dimensions each with stakeholders, actions and goals towards continual improvement of services.

Figure 2.


Complete Chapter List

Search this Book: