◄◄◄ Previous Page         


          Next Page ►►►




Can one Metamodel be used for Enterprise Architecture and Engineering modelling?


Develop a Hybrid Metamodel for Enterprise Architecture and Engineering modelling.

In reality one Metamodel to cover the entire Transformation domain does not exist and so a hybrid approach is needed. Here we see a full hybrid meta-model, constructed by taking the most appropriate things from various meta-models and producing a meta-model with 100% coverage. Horizontally - from a Structural and a Transformational perspective, Vertically - from a Strategy to Deployment perspective.

You may be surprised that the part that Pragmatic contributes is so small. However this is perfectly understandable as Pragmatic have always asserted that lack of meta-models has rarely been the reason for EA’s failure and since there are already a multitude of Metamodels already in existence it would be churlish to re-invent the wheel so to speak. It has, however, made a massive contribution by the introduction of Transformation Debt™ Agreements (TDAs) that allow the exposing and management of Transformation Debt™ and with the definition of the vessels (Ontology) that all these frameworks co-exist within, most notably MACE and MAGMA.

However, a full Pragmatic Metamodel is in production, which will cover all domains and all levels.

What Hybrid Meta-model are you currently using?

Is this a good starting point for a complete and Pragmatic meta-model?

Who could create such a hybrid meta-model?

How would you implement such a hybrid meta-model?

How long would it take to create?

Are there any tools that can implement and utilse Hybrid Meta-models?


◄◄◄ Previous Page          

          Next Page ►►►

© 2008-2018 Pragmatic EA Ltd