The Enterprise Business Motivation Model (EBMM v3.5 - Nick
Malik) is interesting because it attempts to define entities in both the
Structural and Transformational areas, although again it only covers the higher
levels. It was formed from OMG’s BMM by Microsoft’s Internal EA team and is
influenced by the writings of well-known authors like Geary Rummler, Alan
Brache, and Alexander Osterwalder.
With respect to Structure:
Business Capability and Business Process come under the Methods
domain of MACE.
Data Object comes under the Artefacts domain of MACE (unless Data
Objects are being used to perform the Methods, in which case they could come
Business Unit comes under the Culture domain of MACE.
Application comes under the Environment domain of MACE (unless
Applications are being produced by the Methods, in which case they could come
With respect to Transformation:
Business, Business Model and Driver come under the Motivation
domain in MAGMA (although the Principles sub area really sits under Guidance).
Initiative comes under the Actions domain in MAGMA.
Assessment comes under the Assessment domain in MAGMA.
Influencer and Directive come under the Guidance domain of MAGMA
(which as previously stated should also include Principles).
Do you know of any other
meta-models which define both Structural and Transformational information in
an integrated way?
Are the meta-models you use
integrated, if not what problems are likely to result?
How do you integrate
Structural and Transformational artefacts?
If you don’t, does it cause
problems that your Structural and Transformational artefacts are not related?