A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models

Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia ISSN: 0120-6230 [email protected] Universidad de Antioquia Colombia Pardo-Calvache, César Jesús; García-Rubio, Félix Oscar; Piattini-Velthuis, Mario; Pino-Correa, Francisco José; Baldassarre, María Teresa A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia, núm. 73, diciembre, 2014, pp. 29-42 Universidad de Antioquia Medellín, Colombia Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=43032606003 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N. º73 pp. 29-42, December, 2014 A reference ontology for harmonizing process- reference models Una ontología de referencia para la armonización de modelos de referencia de procesos César Jesús Pardo-Calvache1*, Félix Oscar García-Rubio2, Mario Piattini- Velthuis 2, Francisco José Pino-Correa3, María Teresa Baldassarre4 1 Grupo de Investigación I+D+I en TIC, Universidad EAFIT. Cra. 49 No. 7 Sur 50. C.P. 050022. Medellín, Colombia. 2 Grupo ALARCOS, Departamento de Tecnologías y Sistemas de Información, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha. Paseo de la Universidad, 4. C.P. 13071. Ciudad Real, España. 3 Grupo de Investigación y Desarrollo en Ingeniería del Software, Facultad de Ingeniería Electrónica y Telecomunicaciones, Universidad del Cauca. Calle 5 N.° 4-70. C.P. 190003. Popayán, Colombia. 4 Department of Informatics, Software Engineering Research and Practices, University of Bari.Via E. Orabona 4. C.P. 70126. Bari, Italy. (Received January 13, 2013; accepted July 24, 2014) Abstract For a couple of decades, process quality has been considered one of the main factors in the delivery of high quality products. Multiple models and standards have emerged as a solution to this issue. However, for any company, the harmonization of diverse models with the aim at fulfilling its quality requirements is not an easy task to pursue. The difficulty fundamentally lies in the fact that there is a lack of specific guidelines, together with an evident inexistence of a homogeneous representation that could make the endeavour with regards to Software Engineering less intense. In order to address this challenge, this paper presents a Ontology of Process-reference Models, called PrMO. It defines a Common Structure of Process Elements (CSPE) as a means to support the harmonization of structural differences of multiple reference models, through the homogenization of their process structures. PrMO has been validated through instantiation of the information contained in different models, such as CMMI-(ACQ, DEV), ISO (9001, 27001, 27002, 20000-2), ITIL, COBIT, Risk IT, Val IT, BASEL II, amongst others. Both the common structure and the homogenization method are presented herein, along with an application example. * Corresponding author: César Jesús Pardo Calvache, e-mail: [email protected] 29 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 A WEB tool to support the homogenization of models is also described, along with other uses which illustrate the advantages of PrMO. The proposed ontology could be extremely useful for organizations and consultants that plan to embark on the harmonization of multiple models. ---------- Keywords: Harmonization of multiple models and standards; homogenization; mapping; integration; ontology; processes; software engineering Resumen Desde hace un par de décadas, la calidad del proceso ha sido considerada como uno de los factores principales para la entrega de productos con alta calidad. Una gran variedad de modelos y estándares han surgido como solución a este problema, sin embargo, la implementación de varios modelos para que una empresa cumpla con múltiples requisitos de calidad no es una tarea fácil. La dificultad radica en la falta de directrices específicas y una representación homogénea que facilite el trabajo en esta línea de la ingeniería de software. Para hacer frente a esta situación, en este trabajo se presenta una ontología de modelos de referencia de procesos, llamado PrMO. Esta ontología define una Estructura Común de Elementos de Procesos (ECEP) como medio para apoyar la armonización de las diferencias estructurales entre múltiples modelos. La armonización se lleva a cabo a través de la homogeneización de las estructuras de procesos de cada uno de los modelos. PrMO ha sido validada a través de la instanciación de la información contenida en diferentes modelos, tales como CMMI-(ACQ, DEV), ISO (9001, 27001, 27002, 20000- 2), ITIL, COBIT, RISK IT, Val IT, BASEL II, entre otros. Tanto la estructura común (ECEP) y el método de homogeneización son presentados junto con un ejemplo de aplicación. Asimismo, se presenta una herramienta web que permite apoyar la homogeneización de los modelos, esto permite ilustrar mejor las ventajas de PrMO. La ontología propuesta podría ser de gran utilidad para las organizaciones y consultores que planean llevar a cabo la armonización de múltiples modelos. ---------- Palabras clave: Armonización de múltiples modelos y estándares; homogeneización; mapeo, integración; ontología; procesos; ingeniería de software Introduction / International Electro-technical Commission With the purpose of providing solutions that (ISO/IEC) 20000-2, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC allow us to define suitable processes for 9001, Information Technology Infrastructure addressing different needs, a wide range of Library (ITIL), Software Engineering Body of models and standards have been developed Knowledge (SWEBOK), Control Objectives for (hereafter called reference models), which Information and Related Technology (COBIT), can be used as process reference models. E.g. ISO/IEC 12207, Capability Maturity Model International Organization for Standardization Integration (CMMI), and so forth. Besides these 30  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models models, there are different assessment models, which it is constituted by, and that are also common such as Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for to any model. It can thus be used independently Process Improvement (SCAMPI), ISO/IEC from the reference model to be harmonized. 15504-5, CMM-Based Appraisal for Internal Based upon the ontology, a common schema Process Improvement (CBA-IPI), Systems or Common Structure of Process Elements Engineering Capability Model Appraisal Method (CSPE) has been defined. This has allowed the (EIA/IS 731.2), Software Capability Evaluation homogenization of the process elements of (SCE V3.0 Method Description), amongst others. some models, resolving their differences before This emerging mass of models and standards performing any comparison, mapping, integration contributes to the fact that software organizations or unification. A prototype tool which makes use can assess and institutionalize new or improved of the models information, homogenized through processes, increasing their competitiveness and CSPE, has also been presented. producing higher quality products. Additionally, The rest of the paper is organized as follows. this allows them to choose a particular model to Initially an analysis of the related works is cover a specific issue, or select several models shown. Then the Ontology of Process-reference to address different needs. Currently, there Models (PrMO), a Common Structure of Process are a number of factors that may persuade an Elements to support the homogenization of organization to consider the need to work with multiple models, and a homogenization method more than one model [1]. For example, (i) market to support their application are described. Later niches with specific models, (ii) improvement of the application of the common structure and the practices from legacy process models, (iii) homogenization of some process elements of business positioning, (iv) leveraged or merger ISO 20000-2, together with an overview of corporate (v) systematic search of the capability a supporting tool, is discussed. Finally, some of the processes, (vi) business growth, and others. conclusions and future work are presented. Software organizations have found it difficult to work with more than one model at the same Background time. However, they often make a great effort to interpret them. This difficulty presents itself due The systematic literature review presented in [1], to the fact that each model has been defined from shows a few efforts related to the harmonization different opinions, work groups, (cultural and of multiple models such as PrIME project of the political), interests and bodies. Individual models, SEI [3], Enterprise SPICE [4], IT Governance therefore, carry within them their own perspective Institute (ITGI), and Office of Government on quality. This is, each of them defines its own Commerce (OGC), displaying the alignment of element process structure, scope, orientation, COBIT 4.1, ITIL V3 and ISO/IEC 27002 for purpose, and other characteristics, making some Business Benefit [5], among other publications problems in the use of the reference models arise. and works analyzed. Some of them are: Formal description of process Very few of them, however, have proposed models; compatibility and transformability; solutions to resolve the problems and structural benchmark of process attributes [2]. differences arising between models that are Taking into consideration all the above, this work being harmonized. Most of them hold mappings has the points at offering a solution to the problem in a unilateral direction and thereby, the process by defining a useful ontology which facilitates the structure of basis model is used as a main harmonization of the process elements which have structure. Some examples to be listed are: The been described by different models. Our ontology well-known mappings by ISO to CMMI [6, identifies and makes use of the process elements 7]. Nonetheless, this solution works only if the 31 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 objective is focused on the instantiation of the related terms in the harmonization of multiple good practices of the base model from the start. models. PrMO complements H2mO, by means This is a situation impossible to be replicated of establishing and clarifying the key process when the organizations face different needs. elements to support the harmonization of multiple models through homogenization of their process This issue raises awareness on the fact that the structures. integration of models should be treated differently if we need to harmonize other models; for example, In this section, an overview of the process ITIL and COBIT or BASEL II and Val IT, in the architecture ontology designed is depicted, case of banking models, together with others. followed by a general overview of such, along with its instantiation from information contained Some studies have focused mainly on the in different models -the CMMI-ACQ V1.2, ISO development of ontologies to represent the key 9001 and others-. Correspondingly, this section elements of particular domains: Ontologies for offers the definition of a Common Structure of representing the ISO and CMMI models; CMMI- Process Elements (CSPE) and its application in SW [8]; CMMI and ISO/IEC 15504 [9, 10]; ISO the homogenization of Specific Goal (SG) 1 of 9001 and CMMI-SW [11]. In [12] is defined an Agreement Management of CMMI-ACQ, as ontology to link the similarities between several well as an example of instance of CMMI based models. Moreover, [13] presents the engineering on ontology. domain ontology developed taking SWEBOK as the basis, in conjunction with others. Concepts of PrMO These ontologies have been defined primarily aiming at understanding the structure of the The generic process constructors of PrMO have process-based quality approaches. Further been designed considering some process elements studies also focus on development ontologies for defined in the process structure of Software supporting business process integration, but this & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel subject goes beyond the scope of this article. Specification (SPEM) 2.0 [15]; e.g. task and product. Using these standard elements and not Taking into account the situation above described, others (process elements of a particular model such it possible to see that most studies have focused as CMMI, ITIL, for example), a homogeneous essentially on the development of ontologies deal is ensured, which is independent from the to represent and/or support the key elements process structure of reference models used during of particular domains. As a result, no proposal their harmonization. standard (that was independent and designed exclusively to support the homogenization of Along with process elements taken from SPEM structural differences between multiple models 2.0, we have noted from our experience that it before they are compared and/or integrated) was was necessary to add other process elements to found. Moreover, in contrast to related works give support to the homogenization of the process analyzed, our proposal intends to provide a more elements of other models with a higher degree of fine-grained level. granularity or level of abstraction. Some examples of elements, which are not PrMO: an ontology of process- described in detail in SPEM, are the process reference models elements for resource, tool and process category. The process elements added have been identified PrMO is a sub-ontology which extends one from the analysis of a literature review concerning concept of H2mO [14], quality model. H2mO the commonly-identified process elements which provides a formal and clear definition of the are most widely modeled. These are presented most widely-used techniques, methods and 32  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models in [16-23], and allow us to more clearly specify software measures, as well as the terminology some already-existing process elements, as well related to the act of measuring software. as to decompose them better. The Representation Formalism for Software Additional auxiliary elements have been also Engineering Ontologies known as Representation incorporated: associated elements, along with Formalism for Software Engineering Ontologies some which decompose from other elements. As (REFSENO) [25], made viable the establishment a case in point: steps of tasks, in-out artifacts, of a basic cluster of concepts (classes), of terminal human resources, and time. concept attributes (attributes) and nonterminal concept attributes (relationships) and, therefore, Decomposition of elements allows offering the representation of any reference model. support to the homogenization of process elements Protégé-OWL [26] was used as the tool for the of those models with a higher degree of detail, such creation of our ontology. as The Software Industry Process Model (Modelo de Procesos para la Industria del Software Table 1 shows the glossary of the concepts within MoProSoft), COBIT 4.1, amongst others. PrMO, according to REFSENO formalism. Due to space restrictions, the description of the It must be stated that some concepts depicted terminal and nonterminal concept attributes has herein had already been defined by other been omitted. On the other hand, and in an effort studies (Quality Model and Measure of other to support the homogenization of different models sub-ontologies to mention only one). Two of and the software engineering, some descriptions these concepts are Software Measure Ontology have been adjusted. A graphical representation of and Measurement Ontology, which are part PrMO, both concepts and relationships, is shown of Software Measurement Ontology (SMO) in figure 1, using the UML (Unified Modeling presented in [24]. These sub-ontologies provide Language). and clarify the key elements in the definition of Table 1 Glossary of concepts in the PrMO Concept Super-concept Descriptions Process Concept A Process Category comprises interrelated processes. [New concept]. Category Process Concept Coherent set of policies, organizational structures, technologies; procedures, purposes, objectives, and work products that are needed to design, develop, deploy and maintain a software product. [Adapted from [18]. Activity Concept Comprises a set of tasks or actions used to produce and maintain devices as well as to achieve the objectives of the process. The activity includes the procedures, standards, policies, and objectives to create and modify a set of work products. [Adapted from [16]. Task Concept Process element that defines the work done by roles. A task is associated with the input and the output products [Adapted from [15]. Product Concept The set of artifacts to be developed, delivered and maintained in a project is called the product. The products can be of input or output type; mandatory or optional. Products are in most cases tangible artifacts consumed, produced, or modified by Tasks. [Adapted from [[29] [15]] Role Resource Describes a set or group of responsibilities, duties and skills required to perform a specific activity. [Adapted from [30]]. Resource Concept A resource is an asset a business needs to have. In the field of software engineering, there are two main resources of importance: the developers and the tools. [Adapted from [17]. Tool Resource The tools automate the execution of certain activities. [Adapted from [16]. 33 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 Figure 1 Representation of PrMO As shown in Figure 1, in most cases, the Based on PrMO, it was possible to homogenize hierarchies between concepts represent the fact and build some instances and offer support to that in every model all processes in different the information contained in BASEL II, VAL IT, categories or process groups are congregated COBIT, RISK IT, ISO 27002 and ITIL for the together. In the same way, each process is formed first case, and ISO 27001 and ISO 20000-2, for by a set of elements or characteristics, such as: the second case. Due to space curbs, this section activities, tasks, roles; products or artifacts, will focus on showing how ontology has been measurements, and more. The purpose is not instanced and used in two models: CMMI-ACQ to collect all characteristics of all models and and ISO 9001. existing standards, but rather only those that are Further factors such as the harmonization the most common, as well as which are defined in strategy, homogenization, comparison and the models analyzed, making its future adaptation integration methods; benefits, findings, and the and extension possible. harmonization process followed in the interest of harmonizing the models and the standards Instances of PrMO involved in the case studies, are presented in [27] Currently, ontology has been successfully and [28]. applied and used in two real application cases Figure 2 and Figure 3 show excerpts of the within the context of: (i) a research project in instances inside CMMI-ACQ V1.2 and ISO the definition of a unified model for the banking 9001:2008 using Prótegé-OWL. In Figure 2 it is sector and a consultancy organization to support possible to see that the Agreement Management the certification of ISO 20000 part 2 (ISO 20000- (AM) is a process belonging to the Acquisition 2), from efforts and institutionalized practices in Category of CMMI-ACQ, and AM is composed ISO 27001 certificated companies. 34  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models of an Objective (Specific Goal (SG) 1 concerning figure, we have eliminated some concepts such as Satisfy Supplier Agreements). It is also possible task and products, along with their nonterminal to see the Specific Practices (SP) related to this concept attributes. SG. Aspiring to improve the understanding of the Figure 2 Instance of CMMI-ACQ V1.2 using PrMO Figure 3 Instance of CMMI-ACQ V1.2 using PrMO 35 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 Figure 3 shows that Clause 4 System Quality • Part 1: Description (SD1). Includes the Management has been considered as a process of process category, process, objectives, ISO 9001:2008 that belongs to Process Category activities, and related tasks; of the same name. It is also possible to observe one • Part 2: Roles and Resources (SRR2). of its activities: Clause 4.2.3, concerning control Includes the resources, tools, roles, and work of documents relating to the list, are demonstrated disciplines defined to perform the process in letters a, b, c, d, e, f, g. The control set needed to development, activities or tasks. carry out this procedure was to approve, review, update documents, in conjunction with others. • Part 3: Control (SC3). It relates the artifacts, Clause 4.2.1, concerning which products the deliverables, results, goals, and measurements documentation system of quality management that serve as verification milestones in the should include, are mentioned in letters a, b, c, d execution of an activity or task. and e of this clause. • Part 4: Additional Information (SAI4). It PrMO does not only support reference models involves related processes and methods with a clearly defined process structure, but required to obtain a purpose. also the models whose elements are organized in less detailed structures. Therefore, PrMO can The following sections show the HoMethod and support other domains such as business where its application. architectural models may vary (without such emphasis on a process dimension) like software HoMehtod: A method for homogenization and security, amongst others. of models An example of homogenization of structures of In order to describe the process elements making several models by means of PrMO is presented use of the proposed structure, we suggest following in Table 4. Since each instance (of PrMO) was a homogenization Method (HoMethod). The constructed in the same way, it was possible to purpose of this is to guide the homogenization of map the models by means of similar process multiple models, step-by-step. In furtherance of elements. CSPE thus allows us to resolve organizing and managing the people, activities the differences between them and to prepare and steps defined in this method, two roles -the any reference model before effectuating any performers and the reviewers- were defined. The comparison, integration or activity with regards activities and tasks involved in the HoMethod, to harmonization of multiple models. and which make use of the proposed structure, are presented below: PrMO as Basis to Homogenize i) Acquisition of knowledge about the models Multiple Models involved. Before carrying out the execution of the harmonization of models, it is Common Structure of Process Elements suggested that an analysis of each model (CSPE) is implemented, according to some of their elements and/or attributes: approach, From process elements defined in PrMO, a size (number of pages), the development Common Structure of Process Elements or organization, and others. CSPE template has been designed. It allows us to have a means of facilitation and support for ii) Structure analysis and terminology. The the harmonization of multiple models, through analysis of the structure of a model can the homogenization of their process structures. happen to be one of the initial implicit steps CSPE has been divided into four sections: in the implementation or the improvement project process. Homogenization supports an 36  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models exhaustive analysis of terminology, syntax Homogenization of ISO 20000-2 and identification of specific words for the This section presents a brief summary of the models. application of the steps described, implementing iii) Identification of requirements. Once the the common structure in homogenization of the analysis has been completed, the identification ISO 9001:2008 standard. The semantic analysis of requirements of software process to be of the standard was executed in accordance to homogenized is made possible. This allows the procedure followed in [6] and [7], where us to define which information of the model the requirements are identified by analysing will be matched and organized in the structure the “Shall” and “Should” statements. Based on elements. An example of syntax defined to a syntax table to identify the requirements in identify the requirements in the ISO models ISO 9001 defined in [31], an analysis and the family is presented in table 2. identification of both requirements, ISO 9001 and ISO 20000-2, were accomplished. iv) Fulfilling correspondence: Such correspondence shows the models reorganized This syntax analysis allowed us to identify the in the four sections of process elements practices required by the highest standards, described by the CSPE structure. The object thereby decreasing a large portion of the of homogenization is to prepare the models for ambiguity and subjectivity involved in trying harmonization in multi-model environments. to understand them. Table 2 shows the syntax used to identify the requirements in ISO 20000- v) Analyzing the results: This activity involves 2. It has been extended and updated from syntax the tasks of resolving the any discrepancies defined in [31], which did not include the analysis within the performers’ outcomes (by of input or output statements, and clauses, as reviewers), together with verifying and possible work products. These are described in validating these results (by reviewers). all ISO standards. vi) Presenting the homogenized model. Table 2 Syntax to identify the requirements in ISO 20000-2 Syntax Descriptions Shall [verb] This statement indicates the actions, activities, tasks or procedures that the organization in charge of its development it will have. It is probable that this Shall [verb] … and [verb] statement will be used to describe one or several actions, or to derive processes. Begins with [shall] or shall [verb] that Identifies a list of derived requirements from processes, procedures, activities or tasks. Shall be [verb] Indicates the characteristics associated with a process, or possible roles or work products. Shall [include] Indicates the details the organization must include in a process or work product Shall be [verb] + [by], [to] or [on] This syntax helps to identify details of some procedures or processes. Indicates a possible work product. It might include some characteristics related to the Documented, input, output work product. Application of CSPE contained in ISO 20000-2. Table 3 shows an example of homogenization of clause 6.5 of ISO/ This section describes the steps completed for IEC 20000-2, using the CSPE template and its the homogenization of models and requirements application employing the HoMethod. 37 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 Table 3 Homogenization of clause 6.5 defined in ISO 20000-2 Process 6.5 Capacity management SD1.1. Process Category 6. Service Delivery Processes SD1.2 ID: 6.5 Name: Capacity management Processes Goal To ensure that the organization has, at all times, sufficient capacity to meet the current and future agreed demands of the business. SD1.4. SD1.5. Task SC3.1. Artifacts Activity The Clause 1. The current and expected requirements of the business in relation to 1. Capacity plan that 6.5 refers to service should be known in terms of what the business is going to need for documents the actual the capacity it. performance of the management 2. The business forecasts and estimates of workload should be translated infrastructure and the to specific requirements and must be documented. expected requirements. 3. The result of changes in workload or environment should be predictable. 2. Documentation with the 4. Current and historical data of the use of components and resources existing options, along with should be collected and analysed. the cost involved in meeting 5. Management capacity should be the focal point for all issues of the business requirements, performance and capacity. and solutions recommended 6. The process should provide direct support to the development of new for achieving the service level services and modifications to these. objectives. 7. A capacity plan must be generated and this should be prepared annually, at least. 8. A good understanding of the technical infrastructure should exist together with its present and projected capabilities. SAI4.1 Related Clause 6.5 is related to clauses 6.1, 7.2 y 9.2. processes An example of the result of the homogenization is it, with regards to process elements of structure, shown in Table 3. Clause 6.5 in this table relates to had made it more possible to understand the the capacity management defined in ISO 20000- requirements associated with it. An example 2. It has been organized and structured according of this is the identification and correspondence to the CSPE Template. Here, it is possible to of activities, tasks and artifacts. For greater note that there was no correspondence between detail about the original descriptions of models all elements in the four sections of the common analyzed, the corresponding reference is structure. This takes place because the standard suggested to be consulted. “doesn’t define” or unfolds detailed information The proposed structure has also been applied for that correspondence. to other models and standards, such as CMMI ISO 20000-2 neither clearly defines nor (DEVelopment and ACQuisition); ISO 9001, documents many of the requirements that it COBIT 4.1, ITIL; Risk IT, Val IT, BASEL II; suggests should be put into operation (activities, ISO 27001, ISO 27002; ISO 20000-2, Project tasks and artifacts, and others). Correspondence Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), and formalization of the information presented in and MoProSoft. See [27, 31, 32]. 38  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models Homogenization through a supporting ISO 20000-2, PMBOK, and MoProSoft. Table 4 tool shows the table of correspondence used, together with an example as to how to homogenize the Within ontology groundwork, one of the process elements of some reference models: the functionalities of HProcessTOOL [33] was CMMI (DEV and ACQ), the ISO (9001, 27001, designed and developed. This is a web tool to 20000-2), and the COBIT. manage harmonization projects by supporting specific techniques. It also supports the Other applications of PrMO are as follows: management which controls and monitors the • The CSPE is being used to develop resulting harmonization projects. When a user functionality: the possibility for the user logs on to the HProcessTOOL, s/he can harmonize to design, construct, apply and analyze, the models involved in a harmonization project and to make appraisals from models stored through CSPE, which, as discussed earlier, is a in the HProcessTOOL. Since it will be template based on PrMO that takes some process supporting reference models stored through elements defined in it, providing a way to support HProcessTOOL and CSPE, it will be flexible the harmonization of reference models. enough to support process appraisals in the The tool has been successfully used in case studies context of global software development, presented earlier, see [33]. The validation and and become adaptable to possible changes demonstration that PrMO can be used on a WEB that may occur with such models. In that platform, has been made attainable. In addition, sense, it could be a useful tool, making it is possible to say that, given the generality quality assessment and improvement of the of PrMO, using the mechanism of inheritance organizations’ processes possible, at a global and restriction to homogenize multiple models, level. has not been necessary. However, since each • CSPE has demonstrated that it could be model uses different names to appoint its process useful as a way to support the assessment elements -or simply because some of them are of structural differences, and to determine not defined- establishing a correspondence table the level of detail in the reference models with regards to the process elements defined in involved in a harmonization project. the ontology has been necessary. Currently, some This allows us to identify an initial set of models and standards have been homogenized differences that necessary to be solved before through OPrM, such as CMMI (DEVelopment and starting any mapping process. ACQuisition), ISO 9001,COBIT 4.1; ITIL, RISK IT, VAL IT; BASEL II, ISO 27001, ISO 27002; 39 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 Table 4 Correspondence of models according to OPrM CMMI-DEV ISO 9001:2008 CMMI-ACQ ISO 27001:2005 PE of CSPE COBIT 4.1 CMMI-SVC ISO 20000-2:20011 Example: CMMI-ACQ V1.2 Example: ISO 9001:2008 Process Categories, e.g. Support, Requirements, e.g. System of Quality Domains, e.g. Plan and Category Engineering, Process and Project Management. organize. Management. Process Process Areas, e.g. Agreement Principal Clauses, e.g. clause Process, e.g. PO1 concerning Management from CMM-ACQ. 4 concerning System of Quality defining a strategic IT plan. Management. Objective Specific Goal (SG), e.g. SG 1 Inherent Information Inherent Information Satisfy Supplier Agreements Activity Specific Practices, e.g. Specific Sub-clauses (IIb), e.g. clause 4.1 Activities, e.g. PO1.1 IT Value Practice 1.1 Execute the Supplier concerning the general requirements. Management. Agreement. Task SCiSPa, e.g. Numeral 5 concerning Information Not found Information Not found Monitor risks involving the supplier. Artifact or Information Not found Clause 7.3.4, e.g. Include Rol & Responsibility Chart Product representatives of functions concerned (RACI), e.g. Business with the design and development stages. Executive role. Role Information Not found Clause 6.3. e.g. infrastructure includes, Information Not found as applicable, a) buildings. Resource Information Not found Information Not found Information Not found Tool Typical Work Products and, e.g. Sub-clauses (IIb), e.g. Clause 4.2.1, Outputs, e.g. Strategic IT Integrated list of issues. describes the term “documented plan. procedure”. Metrics, e.g. to measure Measure Information Not found Information Not found degree of approval of the IT strategic/tactical plans. a. SCiSP: Subpractices Contained in Specific Practices, b. II: Inherent Information Conclusions and Future Work CSPE, allows supporting the homogenization of structural differences found between models. This PrMO has been presented herein, being this an is part of a web tool called the HProcessTOOL. ontology of process-reference models designed We should also add that we are currently to facilitate the harmonization of multiple developing an appraisal tool, which permits the models and standards. The way in that PrMO design, the construction, the application and the has been instanced in a clause of ISO 20000-2, analysis of assessments to be performed inside has also been illustrated. Using the ontology, it an organization, using the homogenized models has possible to develop a functionality which, stored in the HProcessTOOL. through a Common Structure of Process Elements 40  A reference ontology for harmonizing process-reference models The homogenization of models is currently a 2. Y. Wang, G. King. Software Engineering Processes: manual task. Consequently, as future work, Principles and Applications. 1st ed. Ed. CRC Press. Boca Raton, USA. 2000. pp. 1-699. the next step in this study will involve the automation of the homogenization stage through 3. SEI. The PrIME Project. Available on: http://goo.gl/ development of specific algorithms which will p2GX3 Accessed: October 9, 2013 lead us to extend the capability of our tools. It 4. SPICE. Enterprise SPICE. An enterprise integrated is not our intention to automatize all the tasks standards-base model. Available on: http://www. and activities involved. We do, however, wish to enterprisespice.com/ Accessed: October 10, 2013 help users automatize the mapping step or any 5. ITGI. Aligning Cobit 4.1, ITIL V3 and ISO/IEC 27002 process elements that show correspondence with for Business Benefit. Available on: http: http://goo.gl/ our CSPE. HJiZ7v Accessed: October 10, 2013 It should also be said that, since PrMO has been 6. M. Paulk. “How ISO 9001 compares with the CMM”. used to instance different process and reference IEEE Software. Vol. 12. 1995. pp. 74-83. models, it has shown that it can also be used as 7. B. Mutafelija, H. Stromberg. Systematic Process a basis for supporting the design and building of Improvement Using ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI. Ed. organization’s processes. That being the case, we Artech House Boston, USA-London, UK. 2003. pp. 1-324. hope to develop a functionality to support the definition of organizations’ processes through our 8. G. Soydan, Mieczyslaw M. Kokar. An OWL Ontology ontology and tool. The information stored will be for Representing the CMMI-SW Model. 2008. able to be used as a benchmark of processes for Available on: http://km.aifb.kit.edu/ws/swese2006/ final/soydan-full.pdf. Accessed: October 10, 2013 other organizations, as well as to help them while defining their own processes. 9. L. Liao, Y. Qu, H. Leung. A Software Process Ontology and Its Application. Proceedings of the 4th International Although PrMO has been applied in the Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Springer Lecture homogenization of several models, in the quest to Notes in Computer Science. Galway, Ireland. 2005. cover a wider range of needs, we hope to extend pp. 1-8. models and standards modeled through PrMO 10. C. Salviano, A. Figueiredo. Unified Basic Concepts and stored in the HProcessTOOL. for Process Capability Models. Proceedings of the Conference on SEKE. San Francisco, USA. 2008. pp. 173-178. Acknowledgements 11. A. Ferchichi, M. Bigand, H. Lefebvre. An Ontology We acknowledge the assistance of the Spanish for Quality Standards Integration in Software Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Trade, as Collaborative Projects. Proceedings of the 1st well as of the projects GEODAS (TIN2012- Workshop on Model Driven Interoperability for 39493-C03-01, MEC of Spain). Francisco J. Pino Sustainable Information Systems. Montpellier. France. 2008. pp. 17–30 acknowledges the contribution of the University of Cauca, where he works as a full professor.. 12. D. Malzahn. Assessing - Learning - Improving, an Integrated Approach for Self Assessment and Process Improvement Systems. Proceedings of the 4th References International Conference on Systems. IEEE Computer 1. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, M. Society. Gosier, Guadeloupe. 2009. pp. 126-130 Baldassarre. Trends in Harmonization of Multiple 13. O. Mendes, A. Abran. “Software engineering Reference Models. Evaluation of Novel Approaches ontology: A development methodology”. Metrics to Software Engineering, CCIS. (Special edition best News. Vol. 9. 2004. pp. 68-76. papers ENASE 2010, extended and updated paper). Ed. Springer-Verlag. Berlin, Germany. 2011. pp. 61- 14. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, M. 73. Baldassarre.. “An ontology for the harmonization of multiple standards and models”. Computer Standards & Interfaces. Vol. 34. 2012. pp. 48-59 41 Rev. Fac. Ing. Univ. Antioquia N.° 73. December 2014 15. OMG. Software & Systems Process Engineering Meta- 26. Protégé. The Protégé Ontology Editor and Knowledge Model Specification. SPEM 2.0. Available on: http:// Acquisition System. 2012. Available on: http://protege. www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/2.0/. Accessed: October stanford.edu/ Accessed: October 14, 2013. 10, 2013. 27. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, T. 16. G. Cugola, C. Ghezzi. “Software Processes: a Baldassarre, S. Lemus. Homogenization, Comparison Retrospective and a Path to the Future”. Software and Integration: A Harmonizing Strategy for the Process: Improvement and Practice. Vol. 4. 1998. pp. Unification of Multiple-Models in the Banking Sector. 101-123. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Product Focused Software Development and Process 17. J. Derniame, A. Kaba, B. Warboys. “The Software Improvement (PROFES 2011). Ed. Springer: Bari Process: Modelling and Technology”. C. Montenegro Italy. 2011. pp. 59-72. (editor). Software process: principles, methodology, and Technology. Vol. 1500. Ed. Springer. Berlin, 28. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, M. Baldassarre. Germany. 1999. pp. 1-12. A Process for Driving the Harmonization of Models. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on 18. A. Fuggetta. Software process: A Roadmap. Product Focused Software Development and Process Proceedings of the International Conference on Improvement (PROFES 2010). Second Proceeding: Software Engineering (ICSE). Limerick. Ireland. Short Papers, Doctoral Symposium and Workshops. 2000. pp. 25-34. Limerick, Ireland. 2010. pp. 51-54. 19. K. Benali, J. Derniame. Software process modeling: 29 J. Derniame, B. Kaba, D.Wastell. Software Process: What, who and when. Proceedings of the 2nd European Principles, Methodology and Technology. 1st ed. Ed. Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT Springer. Berlin, Germany 1999. 1-307. ‘92), Ed. Springer Verlag. Trondheim, Norway. 1992. pp. 21-25. 30. S. Acuña, A. Antonio, X. Ferré, M. López, L. Maté. “The Software Process: Modelling, Evaluation and 20. A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, B. Nuseibeh. Software Improvement”. S. Chang. (editor). Handbook of process modelling and technology. Advenced Software Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. Development Series. Vol. 3. Ed. John Wiley & Sons. Vol. 1. Ed. World Scientific. New Jersey. USA. 2001. Somerset, UK. 1994. 1-384. pp. 193-237. 21. I. McChesney. “Toward a classification scheme for 31. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini. software process modelling approaches”. Information Homogenization of Models to Support multi-model and Software Technology. Vol. 37. 1995. pp. 363-374. processes in Improvement Environments. Proceedings 22. A. Fuggetta. Software Process: A Roadmap. of the 4th International Conference on Software and Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Data Technologies ICSOFT’09. Sofia. Bulgaria. pp. Software Engineering (ICSE). Limerick, Ireland. 2009. 151-156. 2000. pp. 25-34. 32. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, J. Rosado. 23. K. Huff. “Software process modeling”. A. Fuggetta, A. Armonizando ISO/IEC 20000 e ISO/IEC 27001 para Wolf (editors). Software Process, Trends in Software. integrar la gestión de servicios y la seguridad de la Chapter 1. Vol. 4. Ed. John Wiley & Sons. New York, información. Proceedings of the XV Jornadas de USA. 1996. pp. 1-24. Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos (JISBD). Valencia, Spain. 2010. pp. 225-235. 24. F. García, M. Bertoa, C. Calero, A. Vallecillo, F. Ruiz, M. Piattini, M. Genero. “Towards a consistent 33. C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, F. Romero, M. Piattini, terminology for software measurement”. Information M. Baldassarre. “HProcessTOOL: A Support Tool in & Software Technology. Vol. 48. 2006. pp. 631-644. the Harmonization of Multiple Reference Models”. B. Murgante, O. Gervasi, A. Iglesias, D. Taniar, B. 25. C. Tautz, G. Wangenheim, C. Refseno. A representation Apduhan (editors). Proceedings of the ICCSA, LNCS, formalism for software engineering ontologies. Vol. 6786. Ed. Springer. Santander, Spain. 2011. pp. Fraunhofer IESE-Report No. 015.98/E V1.1. Berlin, 370-382. Germany. pp. 1-151. Available on: http://publica. fraunhofer.de/dokumente/PX-55706.html Accessed: October 12, 2013. 42