Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2021, 9, 636-647

https://www.scirp.org/journal/jss
ISSN Online: 2327-5960
ISSN Print: 2327-5952

Enterprise Modeling According to

Enterprise Architects

Małgorzata Pańkowska

Department of Informatics, University of Economics, Katowice, Poland

How to cite this paper: Pańkowska, M. Abstract

(2021). Enterprise Modeling According to
Enterprise Architects. Open Journal of Social In the context of enterprise modeling, this paper is to explain business mod-
Sciences, 9, 636-647. eling. The enterprise modeling has been developed to support different
https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2021.99047
stakeholders in their decision-making processes. Managers, auditors, enter-
Received: July 29, 2021 prise architects, and business developers have particular expectations con-
Accepted: September 26, 2021 cerning the enterprise and they need conceptual modeling. Beyond that,
Published: September 29, 2021 business units, i.e., customers, producers, cooperators, and suppliers are in-
terested in the conceptual modeling and enterprise models. In this paper, au-
thor argues that conceptual modeling is necessary for enterprise manage-
ment, and particularly for internal auditing. Author uses the enterprise archi-
tecture approach, presents enterprise architecture frameworks; discusses en-
terprise modeling methods, languages, and tools to reveal the opportunity to
apply conceptual modeling for enterprise management. This paper aims to
present the application of Assurance Map, tasks and goal modeling in an in-
tegrated conceptual model.

Keywords
Enterprise Modeling, Enterprise Management, Assurance Map, iStar, Goal
Modeling Language, ArchiMate

1. Introduction
Enterprise Architecture (EA) ensures comprehensive understanding and evalua-
tion of the current and desired state of any business organization. It reveals op-
portunities for integration of Information Communication Technology (ICT)
resources and prevents the development of inconsistent business processes and
low quality information. The ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 defines architecture as
concepts and properties of an entity, which can be an enterprise, understood as
an organization addressing particular challenges and issues combined with

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 Sep. 29, 2021 636 Open Journal of Social Sciences
 M. Pańkowska

processes. The EA serves to guide managers in designing business processes and

information system developers in building software applications that are in line
with business vision, mission, strategic objectives and policies. The EA ensures a
holistic view of business processes, systems, information and technology of the
enterprise (Hazra & Unhelkar, 2021). The EA requires models and modeling
processes to translate business vision and strategy into efficient and effective ICT
components. The results of enterprise architect’s work cover the desired ICT
strategies, the new or modified EA, the new or modified set of EA standards, and
a roadmap describing the ICT projects for EA implementation (Minoli, 2008).
This paper aims to answer the research questions, i.e., RQ1: How business mod-
els and modeling issues are discussed in the enterprise modeling publications,
and RQ2: How can enterprise architects implement business models without
ICT designing and implementation. To answer the first RQ, the literature survey
method is applied and for answering the second RQ the integrated model is
proposed and discussed. The paper consists of three sections. The next section
includes discussion on EA modeling approaches and enterprise modeling
frameworks. The third section includes a systematic literature review results on
enterprise modeling in the aspect of business model development and applica-
tion. Further, the author’s model integration is presented. This integrated model
is a solution that combines ArchiMate language model, iStar 2.0 Goal Modeling
Language (GoalML) enterprise model, and the Assurance Map for auditing
tasks. This integrated model is to support the business organization operational
management and internal auditing, as well as to illustrate that conceptual mod-
eling is needed for business management.

2. Business Issues in Enterprise Architecture Frameworks

Within the EA scope, the business architecture determines the structure of the
enterprise in terms of its governance structure, business processes, and business
information. In description of the enterprise, business architecture concerns
business partners, finances, and the ever-changing market to align strategic
business goals with decisions regarding products and services, partners and sup-
pliers, their capabilities and key initiatives.
In general, the enterprise architects develop the enterprise modeling as a dis-
cipline capturing relevant knowledge and providing motivation to design infor-
mation systems that support the business organization management. First and
foremost, they focus on architecture-driven support of the digital transformation
of business units. However, for enterprise architects, capturing the business mo-
tivation to this transformation, evaluation of digital transformation process and
results, and business requirements for designing are challenges. Although enter-
prise architects focus on the EA development for the digital transformation, the
question is how they answer these challenges and what other applications of EA
are possible.
Nowadays, EA is a discipline of designing enterprise guided with principles,

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 637 Open Journal of Social Sciences

M. Pańkowska

frameworks, methodologies, requirement, tools, reference models and standards.

There are many frameworks that support the EA modeling and development,
e.g., Zachman Framework (ZF), Generic Enterprise Reference Architecture and
Methodology (GERAM), Purdue Enterprise Reference Architecture (PERA),
Computer Integrated Manufacturing Open System Architecture (CIMOSA),
Lightweight Enterprise Architecture (LEA), Nolan Norton Framework (NNF),
Extended Enterprise Architecture Framework (E2AF), Enterprise Architecture
Planning (EAP), Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF), Treasury
Enterprise Architecture Framework (TEAF) (Bernus, Nemes, & Schmidt, 2003).
The mentioned frameworks are the ICT artifact-oriented and only some of them
(e.g., ZF, CIMOSA, Unified Architecture Framework (UAF), the Ministry of
Defense Architectural Framework (MODAF), or The Open Group Architecture
Framework (TOGAF)) include business issues considerations and deeper analy-
sis on strategic and operational management.
The Zachman Framework provides a basic structure for organizing business
architecture through dimensions such as data, function, network, people, time,
and motivation (Zachman, 2010). Zachman describes the ontology for the en-
terprise through negotiations among several actors. The ZF presents various
views and aspects of the enterprise architecture in a highly structured form. It
differentiates between the levels: Scope (i.e., contextual and planner view), En-
terprise Model (i.e., conceptual and owner view), System Model (i.e., logical and
designer view), Technology Model (i.e., physical and builder view), and Detailed
Representation (i.e., out-of-context and subcontractor view), and Functioning
Enterprise (i.e., user view). In the ZF model, for each view, there are six ques-
tions, i.e., What? How? Where? Who? When? and Why? Taking into account
the question Why? the enterprise architect is required to analyze the enterprise
business plan, strategies and rules. Hence, the business goals, processes, enter-
prise stakeholders, and their resources are modelled and controlled. Similarly,
the business issues’ considerations are included in the MODAF, which covers
seven viewpoints, i.e., All View, Acquisition, Strategy, Operational, System, Ser-
vice, and Technical viewpoint (Perks & Beveridge, 2003).
The CIMOSA framework is based on four abstract views (i.e., function, in-
formation, resource and organization views) and three modeling levels (i.e., re-
quirements definition, design specification, and implementation description
(Spadoni & Abdmouleh, 2007). The four modeling views are provided to man-
age the integrated enterprise model. The role of each view is to filter components
out of the model according to a given perspective. For the management of views,
CIMOSA architects assume a hierarchy of business units that are grouped into
divisions.
The TOGAF Model (2021) comprises the Architecture Development Method
(ADM) that includes references to diagram types, e.g., Application Communica-
tion Diagram, Application and User Location diagram, Enterprise Manageability
Diagram, and Application Migration Diagram. The ArchiMate language is fun-
damental for the enterprise modeling according to TOGAF. It enables modeling

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 638 Open Journal of Social Sciences

 M. Pańkowska

of the business issues, applications and technology artifacts, as well as business

motivation issues, which explain a context for the ICT implementation in a
business unit. The Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) is the next genera-
tion architecture framework derived from the Department of Defense Architec-
ture Framework (DODAF) and MODAF (UAF, 2020). The UAF is applied for
modeling the security controls, threats, risks, and risk mitigation. It includes
elements needed for defining capabilities, requirements, operational behaviors,
ICT and business resources, data, and personnel.

3. Business Issues in Enterprise Modeling Frameworks

The term “enterprise” means a concept to identify a company, social organiza-
tion or governmental institution. An enterprise is defined as a consciously coor-
dinated social entity, with a relatively identifiable boundary and achievable goals
(Hoogervorst, 2009). In enterprise engineering, system theory and system ap-
proach have dominated for the last fifty years, and the enterprise engineering is
underpinned by two fundamental concepts, i.e., ontology and architecture. Both
these concepts are valid for the enterprise modeling. Although the concept of
“enterprise engineering” is still valid, the enterprise modeling is a subject of in-
terest of many researchers. Figure 1 includes a comparison of publications on
enterprise modeling and enterprise engineering in Scopus in 2010-2021. The
numbers are similar, although enterprise engineering dominates in the computer
science.
In general, enterprise modeling covers the presentation of business goals,
processes, resources, data, and stakeholders. Each element can be supported as a
particular viewpoint by a different modeling language and visualized separately.
The resulting enterprise models are to be synchronized since they all make
statements to provide a complete and holistic representation of the enterprise.
There are some approaches, which are declared by their authors as developed
particularly for enterprise modeling, e.g., Multi-Perspective Enterprise Modeling
(MEMO), Design and Engineering Methodology for Organizations (DEMO),

Figure 1. Publications on enterprise engineering and enterprise modeling in Scopus.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 639 Open Journal of Social Sciences

M. Pańkowska

Semantic Object Model (SOM), Enterprise Architecture Modeling (EAM), and

Four Enterprise Modeling (4EM). The MEMO framework includes modeling
languages for various domains such as business processes, organizational struc-
tures, corporate strategies, and object models (Bock & Frank, 2016). In enter-
prise modeling, the use of Domain-Specific Modeling Language (DSML) pro-
vides researchers with concepts that are reconstructed from the relevant domain
of discourse. It enables modeling productivity as they do not need to construct
domain-specific concepts from basic linguistic constructs. The MEMO frame-
work included three main languages to model the organizational action system.
Hence, the Goal Modeling Language (GoalML) enables the design and analysis
of enterprise goal system. The iStar software is the GoalML tool (Dalpiaz,
Franch, & Horkoff, 2016). The second is the Organization Modeling Language
(MEMO OrgML), which allows to model organizational structures and business
processes. The last one is the Information Technology infrastructure Modeling
Language (ITML). The MEMO framework comprises four key elements, i.e., a
high level framework, domain-specific modeling languages, and accompanying
methods and tools. The high-level conceptual framework represents a holistic
perspective on an enterprise that includes three other sub-perspectives, i.e.,
strategy, organization, and information system. They are further detailed into
various aspects, i.e., resources, structure, process, and goal. Perspectives are sup-
plemented and characterized by problem classes and they are associated with
corresponding modeling methods. Although Frank (2014) argues that MEMO
business models provide an important abstraction to improve organizational
performance and competitiveness, he elaborates the models for software system
development.
According to the DEMO framework developers, an enterprise consists of three
coherent and mutually dependent organizational layers, i.e., the B-organization
(business), the I-organization (information), and the D-organization (docu-
ment) and modeling should concern all three layers (Dietz, 2006). Beyond that,
DEMO framework includes four other models, i.e., the Cooperation Model, the
Action Model, the Process Model and the Fact Model (Dietz, 2021). These mod-
els are also interrelated. The Cooperation Model is a model of cooperation be-
tween the organization’s actors. The Action Model covers the organization’s op-
erations, action rules, and work instructions. The Process Model covers the or-
ganization’s landscape of processes and links among them. The Fact Model is a
model of the products in the organization and it contains the specification of
entity types, value types, property types and attribute types, which all are appro-
priate for the modeled enterprise. The Semantic Object Model is a comprehen-
sive methodology for modeling business systems. A business system is defined as
an open, goal-oriented, and socio-technical system, which interacts with its en-
vironment. The SOM methodology focuses on the tasks and resources of the
business system, analysis of chances and risks, as well as on additional analysis of
the strengths and weaknesses of the enterprise. Strategies of products, markets,

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 640 Open Journal of Social Sciences

 M. Pańkowska

business resources, processes, and business rules are objects of considerations

(Ferstl, Sinz, & Bork, 2016). The 4EM methodology developers propose to focus
on a modeling procedure, performance of enterprise modeling in the form of a
project with predetermined goals, rules and roles, involvement of the enterprise
stakeholders and the domain experts in this project, and choose appropriate
modeling tools. This approach concentrates on business modeling, however
technical components and requirement models are also included for further in-
formation system development (Sandkuhl, Stirna, Persson, & Wisotzki, 2014).
The ISO 19439:2006 on enterprise modeling framework proposes to consider
the following four views: function and process view, information and object
view, resource and infrastructure view, and organization view. Hence, the enter-
prise functionalities and human behaviors, information objects and relationships
among them, human and technical components, and their capabilities and com-
petencies, as well as organizational units, decision centers and decision levels are
to be included in an enterprise model. The ISO 19440:2020 proposes to analyze
the following views of an enterprise: function, information, organization, re-
source, collaboration, and decision. The organization view includes the organi-
zational and decisional structure of the enterprise, the responsibilities and au-
thorities, and decision centers in the enterprise. Resource view comprises people
and things in a specific context. Collaboration view is developed to reveal the
material, informational, and financial flows and exchanges among the enter-
prise’s internal units and between the enterprise and its value chain partners.
Decision view enables to represent decision-making processes, decision system
structure, topics, their categories, criteria, and dependencies. To summarize, en-
terprise modeling is to provide abstract representations, i.e., artifacts to support
understanding, analysis, design, reasoning, administration, monitoring, control,
and even learning on the enterprise. In fact, the EM is the art of presenting the
knowledge in the form of models about the structure, functionalities, manage-
ment, and maintenance of the whole or a part of an enterprise, as well as the re-
lationships with its environment. The goal is to model the enterprise to increase
the efficiency, profitability, effectiveness, competitiveness, and sustainability of
the enterprise. The conceptual model is always an abstraction, simplified repre-
sentation, and approximation of the reality, which is observed by developer or
researcher.
The answer to the RQ1 How business models and modeling are discussed in
the enterprise modeling publications, is included in the systematic literature re-
view results. The literature search was done using the following databases: Asso-
ciation of Information Systems electronic Library (AIS eLib), Emerald Insight,
Scopus, Sage Journals, and IEEEXplore. Search term was a combination of “en-
terprise” AND “modeling” AND “management”. The search yielded a total of
2496 papers published in 2010-2021. However, based on titles, keywords, and
abstracts only 36 papers were deemed to be of potential interest. Finally, just 9
the most meaningful papers have been included in Table 1. The searching string

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 641 Open Journal of Social Sciences

M. Pańkowska

Table 1. Enterprise Modeling (EM) in Literature Survey.

Reference Research Findings

Fayoumi & Williams, The paper considers EM from a socio-technical systems (STS) perspective
2021 and a new model of enterprise was derived from STS theory and combined
with STS practices.

Vernadat, 2020 The paper summarizes the research works on enterprise modeling in the
last four decades, outlining the modeling constructs, tools, and methods.

Bider & Lodhi, 2019 The paper evaluates whether EM helps in an analysis of hypotheses for
radical change of Business Model Innovation. That analysis supports new
assets acquisition

Vallespir & Ducq, The paper presents the evolution of the EM techniques from the divergence
2018 era to the convergence time, to model-driven approaches and
interoperability problem solving.

Stirna & Sandkuhl, Authors argue that enterprise model consists of a number of related
2018 sub-models, each describing the organization from a particular view, i.e.,
process, rule, goal, actor, or data. However, in each case, the individual set
of models can be created.

Alpers et al., 2018 Authors focus on modeling privacy from business and software engineering
perspective.

Petrikina, Drews, Authors analyze the possibilities for integrating the enterprise architecture
Schirmer, & and business model.
Zimmermann, 2014

Arachchige, Weigand, In this paper, a meta-modeling approach is used to map the service
& Jeusfeld, 2012 modeling language with value network (e3 value), data and process model.

De La Fuente, Ros, & The paper proposes an enterprise modeling methodology to support the
Ortiz, 2010 supply chain reengineering and integration.

“enterprise” AND “modeling” AND “management” provided so many results,

because there are plenty of possible interpretations of these three words as well
as many combinations of these concepts. The differentiation of research me-
thods and techniques is high. There are papers focusing strictly on enterprise
modeling in ArchiMate or Unified Modeling Language (UML), but there are al-
so papers on econometric modeling of the enterprise and use of statistical me-
thods. Shen (2021) introduced the modeling and analysis of the complex system
of human capital accumulation in high-tech enterprises based on big data. He
proposed an application of regression analysis and the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP).

4. Enterprise Management Integrated Model

The intriguing nature of management subject and a variety of goals, which en-
terprises pursue, raises the need for enterprise modeling towards specific mana-
gerial demands in organizations. In order to address these requirements an inte-
grated model is proposed. This approach takes into account that enterprise arc-
hitects do not reject the idea of a model’s integration.
The proposed model refers to the combination of enterprise modeling me-
thods for particular business purposes and applied in particular business situa-

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 642 Open Journal of Social Sciences

 M. Pańkowska

tions. The business operational management results from long-term strategic

management and includes short-term planning, decision making, organization
of human, physical, and financial resources, realization of processes, controlling
and auditing of business effectiveness, efficiency, resilience, value creation, secu-
rity, and privacy protection. The strategic management covers the formulation
of the business strategy, its realization, evaluation, and improvement. Funda-
mental processes of management and auditing are included in Figure 2.
In this paper, the integrated model combines the Business Model written in
the ArchiMate language (Figure 2), Business Goal Model visualized in iStar tool
for GoalML (Figure 3), and the Assurance Map developed for auditing tasks
monitoring (Figure 4). All the models are combined through actors, goals, and
tasks. Assurance Map and assurance-based management are the objective ex-
amination tools to perform an independent assessment over business activities
(Practice Guide, 2021). The primary purpose of the Assurance Map is to detect
areas of gaps and duplications in assurance efforts among business units. There
are four assurance levels representing the quality and the level of evidence by
each department (Figure 4). The High Assurance (H on Green) is detailed and
cyclically conducted. As it is critical for business actors, controls are provided,
risks are mitigated, and policies are communicated. The Medium Assurance (M
on Yellow) is not cyclically performed, but occasionally realized. Some risks are
neglected, policies are not fully elaborated, and the controls are not automated.
The Low Assurance (L on Orange) means lack of significant concerns over the
adequacy of control. The None Assurance (N on Red) means lack of assurance and
lack of policies. Empty cells mean indetermination or non-applicability. The As-
surance Map is created individually for each enterprise to enable understanding the

Figure 2. Processes, Stakeholders, Business Actors, Goals and Roles in ArchiMate model.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 643 Open Journal of Social Sciences

M. Pańkowska

Figure 3. Actors, goals, tasks and resources, and their interdependencies in GoalML model.

Figure 4. Activities, actors, risks and assurance level in assurance Map model.

key risks and to support compliance and business resilience.

5. Conclusion
Although there are many approaches to enterprise modeling, conceptual mod-

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 644 Open Journal of Social Sciences

 M. Pańkowska

eling can be useful not only to the design and implementation of ICT, but the
artifacts created are valuable for business management, in particular for control-
ling and planning business activities and responsibilities. Dealing with the arti-
facts requires the managers to understand their developed models in relation to
those who focus on the artifacts’ implementation in practice, e.g., controllers,
supervisors.

Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this pa-
per.

References
Alpers, S., Pilipchuk, R., Oberweis, A., & Reussner, R. (2018). Identifying Needs for a
Holistic Modelling Approach to Privacy Aspects in Enterprise Software Systems.
ICISSP2018—Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Information Systems
Security and Privacy (pp. 74-82). https://doi.org/10.5220/0006606200740082
Arachchige, J. J., Weigand, H., & Jeusfeld, M. (2012). Business Service Modeling for the
Service-Oriented Enterprise. International Journal of Information System Modeling
and Design, 3, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijismd.2012010101
Bernus, P., Nemes, L., & Schmidt, G. (2003). Handbook on Enterprise Architecture.
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24744-9
Bider, I., & Lodhi, A. (2019). Using Enterprise Modeling in Development of New Busi-
ness Models. ICEIS 2019—Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Enter-
prise Information Systems, 2, 525-533. https://doi.org/10.5220/0007769205250533
Bock, A., & Frank, U. (2016). Multi-Perspective Enterprise Modeling—Conceptual Founda-
tion and Implementation with ADOxx. In D. Karagiannis, H. C. Mayr, & J. Mylopoulos
(Eds.), Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling, Concepts, Methods and Tools (pp.
269-290). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39417-6_11
Dalpiaz, F., Franch, X., & Horkoff, J. (2016). iStar 2.0 Language Guide.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1605.07767.pdf
De La Fuente, M. V., Ros, J., & Ortiz, A. (2010). Enterprise Modelling Methodology for
Forward and Reverse Supply Chain Flows Integration. Computers in Industry, 61,
702-710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2010.05.010
Dietz, J. L. G. (2006). Enterprise Ontology, Theory and Methodology. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-33149-2
Dietz, J. L. G. (2021). The DEMO Specification Language v 4.6.
https://ee-institute.org/download/demo-specification-language-4-6/
Fayoumi, A., & Williams, R. (2021). An Integrated Socio-Technical Enterprise Modelling:
A Scenario of Healthcare System Analysis and Design. Journal of Industrial Informa-
tion Integration, 23, Article ID: 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100221
Ferstl, O. K., Sinz, E. J., & Bork, S. D. (2016). Tool Support for the Semantic Object Mod-
el. In D. Karagiannis, H. C. Mayr, & J. Mylopoulos (Eds.), Domain-Specific Conceptual
Modeling, Concepts, Methods and Tools (pp. 291-312). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39417-6_13
Frank, U. (2014). Multi-Perspective Enterprise Modeling: Foundational Concepts, Pros-
pects and Future Research Challenges. Software and System Modeling, 13, 941-962.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-012-0273-9

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 645 Open Journal of Social Sciences

M. Pańkowska

Hazra, T. K., & Unhelkar, H. (2021). Enterprise Architecture for Digital Business, Inte-
grated Transformation Strategies. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315120409
Hoogervorst, J. A. P. (2009). Enterprise Governance and Enterprise Engineering. Sprin-
ger. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92671-9
ISO 19439:2006. Enterprise Integration—Framework for Enterprise Modelling. Geneva:
International Standard Organization. https://www.iso.org/standard/33833.html
ISO 19440:2020. Enterprise Modelling and Architecture—Constructs for Enterprise
Modelling. Geneva: International Standard Organization.
https://www.iso.org/standard/74491.html
ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019. Software, Systems and Enterprise—Architecture Processes.
Geneva: International Standard Organization.
https://www.iso.org/standard/68982.html
Minoli, D. (2008). Enterprise Architecture A to Z, Frameworks, Business Process Model-
ing, SOA, and Infrastructure Technology. CRC Press.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420013702
Perks, C., & Beveridge, T. (2003). Guide to Enterprise IT Architecture. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/b98880
Petrikina, J., Drews, P., Schirmer, I., & Zimmermann, K. (2014). Integrating Business
Models and Enterprise Architecture. 2014 IEEE 18th International Enterprise Distri-
buted Object Computing Conference Workshops and Demonstrations (pp. 47-56).
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2014.16
Practice Guide: Coordination and Reliance: Developing an Assurance Map (2021). The
Institute of Internal Auditor, North America.
https://na.theiia.org/standards-guidance/recommended-guidance/practice-guides/Page
s/coordination-and-reliance-developing-an-assurance-map.aspx
Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., & Wizotzki, M. (2014). Enterprise Modeling, Tack-
ling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43725-4_5
Shen, Y. (2021). Modeling and Research on Human Capital Accumulation Complex Sys-
tem of High-Tech Enterprises Based on Big Data. Complexity, 2021, Article ID:
6635228. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6635228
Spadoni, M., & Abdmouleh, A. (2007). Information Systems Architecture for Business
Process Modelling. In P. Saha (Ed.), Handbook of Enterprise Systems Architecture in
Practice (pp. 366-380). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, IGI Global.
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-189-6.ch022
Stirna, J., & Sandkuhl, K. (2018). Enterprise Modelling: Establishing the Fundament for
Capability Management. In K. Sandkuhl, & J. Stirna (Eds.), Capability Management in
Digital Enterprises (pp. 85-100). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90424-5_5
The TOGAF® Standard, Version 9.2. (2021). The Open Group.
https://publications.opengroup.org/downloadable/customer/products/
UAF OMG Unified Architecture Framework. Unified Architecture Profile (UAFP) Ver-
sion 1.1 (2020). Object Management Group.
https://www.omg.org/spec/UAF/1.1/UAFP/PDF
Vallespir, B., & Ducq, Y. (2018). Enterprise Modelling: From Early Languages to Models
Transformation. International Journal of Production Research, 56, 2878-2896.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1418985
VERNADAT, F. (2020). Enterprise Modelling: Research Review and Outlook. Computers

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 646 Open Journal of Social Sciences

 M. Pańkowska

in Industry, 122, Article ID: 103265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103265

Zachman, J. A. (2010). Framework Standards: What’s It All About? In L. A. Kappelman
(Ed.), The SIM Guide to Enterprise Architecture (pp. 66-70). CRC Press.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2021.99047 647 Open Journal of Social Sciences