Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On Model-Based Coordination of Change in Organizations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Engineering the Transformation of the Enterprise

Abstract

Change seems to be an inherent property of organizations and the enterprises they undertake. During such changes, coordination among the different actors involved is key, in particular when there is a need to consider the longer term impact of change.

When the complexity of an organizations, and/or the context in which it operates, is high, the need emerges to use “represented abstractions” of the organization and its context to support coordinated change. These “represented abstractions”, taking the form of e.g. sketches, narrative descriptions, diagrams, spreadsheets, or formal specifications, are used for informed decision making about changes, as well as to coordinate changes among the different actors that may be involved. We take the stance that these “represented abstractions” are all forms of models. Doing so, does requires us to look beyond the “boxes-and-lines” metaphor that seems to be the traditional way of looking at models in our field.

Meanwhile, the transition to the digital age has resulted in organizations to be (and operate in) a complex and hybrid mix of human and digital actors, while the pace of change has increased as well. This also puts more pressure on the coordination of the changes, and as a direct consequence also puts more pressure on the use of model-based instruments.

The goal of this paper is to explore some of the challenges that these model-based instruments will need to meet (while indeed looking beyond the “boxes-and-lines” metaphor). To this end, we will start with a discussion of our current understanding of the notion of model. We then zoom in on the use of models in the coordination of change. Using this as a base, we finalize with a discussion of some of the main challenges we see in improving the use of model-based instruments for the coordination of change in organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Magalhaes, R., Proper, H.A.: Model-enabled design and engineering of organisations. Organ. Design Enterprise Eng. 1(1), 1–12 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Junginger, S.: Organizational design legacies & service design. Design J. (2015), special Issue: Emerging Issues in Service Design

    Google Scholar 

  3. Magalhaes, R. (ed.): Organization Design and Engineering: Coexistence, Cooperation or Integration? Palgrave-Macmillan, London (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Weick, K.E.: Sense making in Organizations. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor, J.R.: The communicational basis of organization: between the conversation and the text. Commun. Theory. 6(1), 1–39 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Hamers, R.: We want to be a tech company with a banking license (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Alter, S.: Theory of workarounds. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34, 55 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mandis, S.G.: What Happened to Goldman Sachs: An Insider’s Story of Organizational Drift and Its Unintended Consequences. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, MA (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Handel, M.J., Poltrock, S.: Working around official applications: experiences from a large engineering project. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2011 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. pp. 309–312. CSCW ’11, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY (2011). https://doi.org/10.1145/1958824.1958870

  10. Henderson, J.C., Venkatraman, N.: Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Syst. J. 32(1), 4–16 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wagter, R., Proper, H.A., Witte, D.: A theory for enterprise coherence governance. In: Saha, P. (ed.) A Systematic Perspective to Managing Complexity with EA. IGI Publishing, Hershey, PA (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Proper, H.A., Winter, R., Aier, S., de Kinderen, S. (eds.): Architectural Coordination of Enterprise Transformation. The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Apostel, L.: Towards the formal study of models in the non-formal sciences. Synthese. 12, 125–161 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stachowiak, H.: Allgemeine Modell theorie. Springer (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Guarino, B., Guizzardi, G., Mylopoulos, J.: On the philosophical foundations of conceptual models. Inf. Modell. Knowl. Bases XXXI. 321, 1 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Guizzardi, G.: On ontology, ontologies, conceptualizations, modeling languages, and (meta)models. In: Vasilecas, O., Eder, J., Caplinskas, A. (eds.) Databases and Information Systems IV – Selected Papers from the Seventh International Baltic Conference, DB&IS 2006, July 3–6, 2006, Vilnius, Lithuania. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 155, pp. 18–39. IOS Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Harel, D., Rumpe, B.: Meaningful modeling: what’s the semantics of “semantics”? IEEE Comput. 37(10), 64–72 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rothenberg, J.: The nature of modeling. In: Artificial Intelligence, Simulation & Modeling, pp. 75–92. Wiley, New York, NY (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sandkuhl, K., Fill, H.G., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Krogstie, J., Matthes, F., Opdahl, A.L., Schwabe, G., Uludag, O., Winter, R.: From expert discipline to common practice: a vision and research agenda for extending the reach of enterprise modeling. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60(1), 69–80 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Thalheim, B.: The theory of conceptual models, the theory of conceptual modelling and foundations of conceptual modelling. In: Handbook of Conceptual Modeling, pp. 543–577. Springer (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bjekovic, M., Proper, H.A., Sottet, J.S.: Embracing pragmatics. In: Yu, E.S.K., Dobbie, G., Jarke, M., Purao, S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling – 33rd International Conference, ER 2014, Atlanta, GA, USA, October 27–29, 2014. Proceedings. LNCS, vol. 8824, pp. 431–444. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A., Weide, T.P.v.d.: A fundamental view on the process of conceptual modeling. In: Delcambre, L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, O. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling – ER 2005, 24th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Klagenfurt, Austria, October 24–28, 2005, Proceedings. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 128–143. Springer (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Proper, H.A., Guizzardi, G.: On domain modelling and requisite variety – current state of an ongoing journey. In: Practice of Enterprise Modelling (PoEM) 2020. Springer (2020), Forthcoming

    Google Scholar 

  24. Proper, H.A., Verrijn–Stuart, A.A., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A.: Onutility-based selection of architecture-modelling concepts. In: Hartmann, S., Stumptner, M. (eds.) Conceptual Modelling 2005, Second Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM2005), Newcastle, NSW, Australia, January/February 2005. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series, vol. 43, pp. 25–34. Australian Computer Society, Sydney (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Falkenberg, E.D., Verrijn-Stuart, A.A., Voss, K., Hesse, W., Lindgreen, P., Nilsson, B.E., Oei, J.L.H., Rolland, C., Stamper, R.K. (eds.): A Framework of Information Systems Concepts. IFIP WG 8.1 Task Group FRISCO, IFIP, Laxenburg, Austria (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Proper, H.A.: Enterprise architecture: informed steering of enterprises in motion. In: Hammoudi, S., Cordeiro, J., Maciaszek, L.A., Filipe, J. (eds.) Enterprise Information Systems – 15th International Conference, ICEIS 2013, Angers, France, July 4–7, 2013, Revised Selected Papers. LNBIP, vol. 190, pp. 16–34. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Batini, C., Mylopoulos, J.: Abstraction in conceptual models, maps and graphs. In: Tutorial presented at the 37th Intl. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling, ER 2018, Xi’an, China (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ogden, C.K., Richards, I.A.: The Meaning of Meaning – A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. Oxford, Magdalene College, University of Cambridge (1923)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cruse, A.: Meaning in language, an introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Morris, C.: Signs, Language and Behaviour. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1946)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Searle, J.R.: A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. In: Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ullmann, S.: Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning. Basil Blackwell, Oxford (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Henderson-Sellers, B., Gonzalez-Perez, C., Walkerden, G.: An application of philosophy in software modelling and future information systems development. In: Franch, X., Soffer, P. (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops, pp. 329–340. Springer (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kecheng, L., Clarke, R.J., Andersen, P.B., Stamper, R.K., Abou-Zeid, E.S. (eds.): IFIP TC8/WG8.1 Working Conference on Organizational Semiotics – Evolving a Science of Information Systems. Kluwer, Deventer, the Netherlands (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Krogstie, J.: A semiotic approach to quality in requirements specifications. In: Kecheng, L., Clarke, R.J., Andersen, P.B., Stamper, R.K., Abou-Zeid, E.S. (eds.) Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 / WG8.1 Working Conference on Organizational Semiotics: Evolving a Science of Information Systems, pp. 231–250. Kluwer, Deventer, the Netherlands (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lankhorst, M.M., Torre, L.v.d., Proper, H.A., Arbab, F., Boer, F.S.d., Bonsangue, M.: Foundations. In: Enterprise Architecture at Work – Modelling, Communication and Analysis. The Enterprise Engineering Series, 4th edn, pp. 41–58. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A.: Freezing Language; Conceptualisation Processes in ICT Supported Organisations. Ph.D. thesis, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Guizzardi, G.: Ontology, ontologies and the “i” of fair. Data Intell. 2(1–2), 181–191 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Partridge, C., Gonzalez-Perez, C., Henderson-Sellers, B.: Are conceptual models concept models? In: Ng, W., Storey, V., Trujillo, J. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2013. LNCS, vol. 8217, pp. 96–105. Springer (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Proper, H.A., Bjekovic, M.: Fundamental challenges in systems modelling. In: Mayr, H.C., Rinderle-Ma, S., Strecker, S. (eds.) 40 Years EMISA 2019, pp. 13–28. Gesellschaft fur Informatik e.V., Bonn (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bommel, P.v., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A., Weide, T.P.v.d.: QoMo: A modelling process quality framework based on SEQUAL. In: Proper, H.A., Halpin, T.A., Krogstie, J. (eds.): Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD 2007), held in conjunction with the 19th Conference on Advanced Information Systems (CAiSE 2007), Trondheim, Norway, pp. 118–127. CEUR-WS.org (2007)

  42. Frederiks, P.J.M., Weide, T.P.v.d.: Information Modeling: the process and the required competencies of its participants. Data Knowl. Eng. 58(1), 4–20 (2006), best paper award in NLDB 2004 conference

    Google Scholar 

  43. van der Linden, D.J.T., Hadar, I.: Cognitive effectiveness of conceptual modeling languages: examining professional modelers. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wilmont, I., Barendsen, E., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Hengeveld, S.: Abstract reasoning in collaborative modeling. In: Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Rouwette, E.A.J.A., Rittgen, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 45th Hawaiian International Conference on the System Sciences, HICSS-45; Collaborative Systems Track, Collaborative Modeling Minitrack. IEEE Explore, Los Alamitos, CA (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bjekovic, M., Sottet, J.S., Favre, J.M., Proper, H.A.: A framework for natural enterprise modelling. In: IEEE 15th Conference on Business Informatics, CBI 2013, Vienna, Austria, July 15–18, 2013, pp. 79–84. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zarwin, Z., Bjekovic, M., Favre, J.M., Sottet, J.S., Proper, H.A.: Natural modelling. J. Object Technol. 13(3), 1–36 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Harmsen, A.F., Proper, H.A., Kok, N.: Informed governance of enterprise transformations. In: Proper, H.A., Harmsen, A.F., Dietz, J.L.G. (eds.) Advances in Enterprise Engineering II – First NAF Academy Working Conference on Practice-Driven Research on Enterprise Transformation, PRET 2009, held at CAiSE 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 11, 2009. Proceedings. LNBIP, vol. 28, pp. 155–180. Springer, Amsterdam (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Proper, H.A., Lankhorst, M.M.: Enterprise architecture – towards essential sensemaking. Enterprise Modell. Inf. Syst. Architect. 9(1), 5–21 (June 2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Jonkers, H., Lankhorst, M.M., Quartel, D.A.C., Proper, H.A., Iacob, M.E.: ArchiMate for integrated modelling throughout the architecture development and implementation cycle. In: Hofreiter, B., Dubois, E., Lin, K.J., Setzer, T., Godart, C., Proper, H.A., Bodenstaff, L. (eds.) 13th IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing, CEC 2011, Luxembourg-Kirchberg, Luxembourg, September 5–7, 2011, pp. 294–301. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Op’t Land, M., Proper, H.A., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: Enterprise Architecture – Creating Value by Informed Governance. . The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Proper, H.A.: Digital Enterprise Modelling – Opportunities and Challenges. In: Roelens, B., Laurier, W., Poels, G., Weigand, H. (eds.) Proceedings of 14th International Workshop on Value Modelling and Business Ontologies, Brussels, Belgium, January 16–17, 2020. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 2574, pp. 33–40. CEUR-WS.org, http://ceur-ws. org/Vol2574/short3.pdf (2020)

  52. Proper, H.A., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Veldhuijzen van Zanten, G.E.: Communication of enterprise architectures. In: Enterprise Architecture at Work – Modelling, Communication and Analysis. The Enterprise Engineering Series, 4th edn, pp. 59–72. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Proper, H.A., Bjekovic, M., Gils, B.v., de Kinderen, S.: Enterprise architecture modelling – purpose, requirements and language. In: Proceedings of the 13th Workshop on Trends in Enterprise Architecture (TEAR 2018). IEEE, Stockholm (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: Enterprise Governance and Enterprise Engineering. The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  55. Taylor, J.R., Van Every, E.J.: When Organization Fails: Why Authority Matters. Routledge, London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Abraham, R., Niemietz, H., de Kinderen, S., Aier, S.: Can boundary objects mitigate communication defects in enterprise transformation? Findings from expert interviews. In: Jung, R., Reichert, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, EMISA 2013, St. Gallen, Switzerland, September 5–6, 2013. LNI, vol. 222, pp. 27–40. Gesellschaft fur Informatik, Bonn, Germany (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Levina, N., Vaast, E.: The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Q. 29(2), 335–363 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R.: Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907-39. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19(4), 387–420 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Lankhorst, M.M., Torre, L.v.d., Proper, H.A., Arbab, F., Steen, M.W.A.: Viewpoints and visualisation. In: Enterprise Architecture at Work – Modelling, Communication and Analysis. The Enterprise Engineering Series, 4th edn, pp. 171–214. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Band, I., Ellefsen, T., Estrem, B., Iacob, M.E., Jonkers, H., Lankhorst, M.M., Nilsen, D., Proper, H.A., Quartel, D.A.C., Thorn, S.: ArchiMate 3.0 Specification. The Open Group (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Gils, B.v., Proper, H.A.: Enterprise modelling in the age of digital transformation. In: Buchmann, R.A., Karagiannis, D., Kirikova, M. (eds.) The Practice of Enterprise Modeling – 11th IFIP WG 8.1. Working Conference, PoEM 2018, Vienna, Austria, October 31–November 2, 2018, Proceedings. LNBIP, vol. 335, pp. 257–273. Springer (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Barjis, J.: Collaborative, participative and interactive enterprise modeling. In: Filipe, J., Cordeiro, J. (eds.) Enterprise Information Systems, 11th International Conference, ICEIS 2009, Milan, Italy, May 6-10, 2009. Proceedings. LNBIP, vol. 24, pp. 651–662. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Sandkuhl, K., Stirna, J., Persson, A., Wißotzki, M.: Enterprise Modeling: Tackling Business Challenges with the 4EM Method. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Stirna, J., Persson, A.: Ten Years Plus with EKD: Reflections from Using an Enterprise Modeling Method in Practice. In: Proper, H.A., Halpin, T.A., Krogstie, J. (eds.): Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD 2007), held in conjunction with the 19th Conference on Advanced Information Systems (CAiSE 2007), Trondheim, Norway, pp. 97–106. CEUR-WS.org (2007)

  65. Hitchman, S.: Practitioner perceptions on the use of some semantic concepts in the entity relationship model. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 4, 31–40 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hitchman, S.: The details of conceptual modelling notations are important – a comparison of relationship normative language. Commun. AIS 9(10), (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Nordbotten, J.C., Crosby, M.E.: The effect of graphic style on data model interpretation. Inf. Syst. J. 9(2), 139–155 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Caire, P., Genon, N., Heymans, P., Moody, D.L.: Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehensible requirements engineering notations. In: 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE2013), pp. 115–124 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Masri, K., Parker, D., Gemino, A.: Using iconic graphics in entity relationship diagrams: the impact on understanding. J. Database Manag. 19(3), 22–41 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Purchase, H.C., Carrington, D., Allder, J.A.: Empirical evaluation of aesthetics-based graph layout. Empir. Softw. Eng. 7(3), 233–255 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  71. Moody, D.L.: The “physics” of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Granada, D., Vara, J.M., Bollati, V.A., Marcos, E.: Enabling the development of cognitive effective visual DSLs. In: Dingel, J., Schulte, W., Ramos, I., Abrahao, S., Insfran, E. (eds.) Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: 17th International Conference, MODELS 2014, Valencia, Spain, September 28–October 3, 2014. Proceedings, pp. 535–551. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Moody, D.L., Heymans, P., Matulevicius, R.: Visual syntax does matter: improving the cognitive effectiveness of the i* visual notation. Requir. Eng. 15(2), 141–175 (Jun 2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Greefhorst, D., Proper, H.A.: Architecture Principles – The Cornerstones of Enterprise Architecture The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer (2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  75. Lankhorst, M.M., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Jonkers, H., Proper, H.A.,Torre, L.v.d., Arbab, F., Boer, F.S.d., Bonsangue, M., Iacob, M.E., Stam, A.W., Groenewegen, L., Buuren, R.v., Slagter, R.J., Campschroer, J., Steen, M.W.A., Bekius, S.F., Bosma, H., Cuvelier, M.J., ter Doest, H.W.L., van Eck, P.A.T., Fennema, P., Jacob, J., Janssen, W.P.M., Jonkers, H., Krukkert, D., van Leeuwen, D., Penders, P.G.M., Veldhuijzen van Zanten, G.E., Wieringa, R.J.: Enterprise Architecture at Work – Modelling, Communication and Analysis. The Enterprise Engineering Series, 4th edn. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Tribolet, J.M., Sousa, P., Caetano, A.: The role of enterprise governance and cartography in enterprise engineering. Enterprise Modell. Inf. Syst. Architect. 9(1), 38–49 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Pohl, K.: The three dimensions of requirements engineering: a framework and its applications. Inf. Syst. 19(3), 243–258 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Engers, T., Nijssen, S.: Connecting people: semantic-conceptual modeling for laws and regulations. In: Janssen, M., Scholl, H.J., Wimmer, M.A., Bannister, F. (eds.) Electronic Government, pp. 133–146. Springer, Berlin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  79. Ghanavati, S., Amyot, D., Peyton, L.: Compliance analysis based on a goal-oriented requirement language evaluation methodology. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2009), pp. 133–142. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Miller, L.W., Katz, N.: A model management system to support policy analysis. Decis. Support. Syst. 2(1), 55–63 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Belval, Luxembourg

    Henderik A. Proper

  2. University of Luxembourg, Belval, Luxembourg

    Henderik A. Proper

Authors
  1. Henderik A. Proper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henderik A. Proper .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Stephan Aier

  2. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Peter Rohner

  3. Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Joachim Schelp

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Proper, H.A. (2021). On Model-Based Coordination of Change in Organizations. In: Aier, S., Rohner, P., Schelp, J. (eds) Engineering the Transformation of the Enterprise. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84655-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84655-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84654-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84655-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation