David Chen IMS-LAPS University Bordeaux 1, France BARRIERS DRIVEN METHODOLOGY FOR ENTERPRISE INTEROPERABILITY David Chen IMS-LAPS University Bordeaux 1, France Developed within the frame of ATHENA Integrated Project and INTEROP NoE Existing methodologies focus on enterprise integration (ex: GRAI, CIMOSA, PERA, ARIS,…)

Developing Methodology : motivations & objectives Lack of methodological support to implement enterprise interoperability Existing methodologies are not well adapted to handle interoperability issues Need to develop a methodology independent from any application and technology Objectives To define a structured approach in a step by step manner To allow selecting and composing available interoperability solutions and tools according to identified requirements To identify and involve various actors of studied enterprise and specialists To allow measuring the “interoperability degree” between parties To develop methodology Guide the implementation of the interoperability Avoid hazardous approaches (reduce time and cost to implement) Capitalize good practices and solutions

Enterprise interoperability Definition Ex. ERP, SCM, PLM, Virtual enterprise,… Interoperability - Interoperability: the ability for two (or more) systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged (IEEE) application domain Requirements, Generic concepts, experiences, principles, solutions validations and methodology Ex. Concepts, metrics, Interoperability models, framework research domain - Enterprise interoperability: the ability of interaction between enterprise systems. It is considered as significant if the interactions can take place at least at the three different levels: data, services and process, with a semantics defined in a given business context (IDEAS)

Basic Concepts Hypothesis and Research: - Enterprises are not interoperable because there exist barriers to interoperability - Barriers are incompatibilities of various kinds at the various enterprise levels - Identify common barriers to interoperability and solutions to remove barriers ENTERPRISE A ENTERPRISE B INTEGRATED UNIFIED FEDERATED APPROACHES CONCEPTUEL TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONAL BARRIERS BUSINESS PROCESS SERVICE DATA METHODOLOGY ENABLING TOOLS INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS

Interoperability ontology (Naudet, 2007)

Components of the methodology

Interoperability Framework Three basic dimensions: - Interoperability concerns (represent interoperability aspects between two enterprises) Business, Process, Service, Data. - Interoperability barriers (represent incompatibilities between two enterprises) Conceptual (syntax & semantic), Technological (platform & software), Organizational (authority/responsibility & organization). - Interoperability approaches (represent the ways in which the barriers are removed) Integrated, Unified, Federated. Interoperability barriers Interoperability concerns approaches

Interoperability knowledge/solution Template description

Interoperability measurement EIMM vs EIDM Critical Maturity model +++ ++ + Considerable Weak - None concerns CONCEPTUAL TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONAL BUSINESS PROCESS SERVICE DATA Company A +++ ++ + - Company B Iop Interoperability compatibility measurement (EIDM) Interoperability potential Measurement (EIMM) Compatibility matrix Company A Company B +++ + - ++ Interoperability performance measurement (EIDM) Performance measures

Structured approach Define objectives of Io and performance targeted; evaluate the feasibility and cost; project planning Define needs of Io in terms of the levels of the enter- -prise and approach (integrated, unified, federated) Definition of objectives and needs Existing system analysis Select and combine solutions Implementation and test Identify actors, applications and systems involved in interoperation Detect barriers and problems to Io, measure existing Io degree, analyze strong and weak points Search and select available Io solution elements using the interoperability framework Combine and construct a company specific Io solution Implement and test the Io solution; perform a performance measure Training company staff

Structured groups /meetings Project board Define objectives Guide the study Assess solutions Interviewees (provide information) Group of specialists To propose To analyze & to validate To provide information To validate Synthesis group Main responsible people of the company Perform the study and search for solution Implementation/test Interviews Project board t Specialist group Existing system Analysis Select/combine solutions (1) Synthesis Adopted from GRAI methodology

ATHENA A8 Scenario: Carrier-Shipper 1. Definition of objectives and needs Carrier A Shipper Carrier B Who is responsible? How is the process configured? Which applications? What’s the data structure? Sales Order Calculate Rate Delivery Calculate Rate Picking Generate Routing Code Generate Routing Code Packing Generate Label Generate Label Shipment [Provided by SAP for ATHENA A8]

Existing System Analysis – EIMM & EIDM Questionnaire EIMM uses Capability matrix Conceptual Technological Organizational Business MPCE Process BPEL Services Data EXPRESS to obtain Shipper

Existing System Analysis Detecting barriers FedEx Conceptual Technological Organizational Business Proprietary Process Services Data FedEx Xml description +++ ++ + Critical Considerable Weak None - - + ++ +++ Shipper Conceptual Technological Organizational Business Proprietary Process BPEL Services Data Express document

Carrier-Shipper Scenario Barriers

Interoperability knowledge/solutions repository

Select / Combine solutions Template: Data exchange barrier Template elements Description Interoperability concerns Data Interoperability barriers Conceptual barrier - Incompatible syntactic and semantic representation of data at each interacting partner Interoperability problem Different models adopted by the companies makes data exchange difficult as enterprises cannot exchange their data automatically ATHENA solution identified - Conceptual solutions: Annotation of proprietary models according to common ontology to allow data reconciliation - Technical solutions: A3 tools, WSDL Analyzer Outcome of ATHENA results evaluation – Relevance to SMEs - Adoption of the common generic ontology reflecting the business domain - The WSDL Analyzer detects mismatches between data a service expects and provides - Relevant for SME which receive required interfaces of big companies which expect that their smaller business partners adapt to their interfaces

Conclusions Incompatibility is the fundamental concept used in defining the interoperability domain Broad sense, not limited to ‘technical’ aspect but also ‘business’, ‘organization’, and concerns all levels of the enterprise generic characteristic of the interoperability research, regardless of the content of information exchanged between two systems Generic methodology, structured approach supported by Iop framework and Iop measurements, and Iop knowledge repository