1 / 72

ATHENA Put in Perspective Rainer Ruggaber, SAP Arne Berre, SINTEF

ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal. ATHENA Put in Perspective Rainer Ruggaber, SAP Arne Berre, SINTEF. By 2010, enterprises will be able to seamlessly interoperate with others. Main Objective:

jaime-merrill
Download Presentation

ATHENA Put in Perspective Rainer Ruggaber, SAP Arne Berre, SINTEF

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Put in Perspective Rainer Ruggaber, SAP Arne Berre, SINTEF

  2. By 2010, enterprises will be able to seamlessly interoperate with others Main Objective: Contribution to enabling enterprises to seamlessly interoperate with others Seamlessinteroperability no interoperability ATHENA past 2010

  3. Interoperability Definition • Interoperability (Def): “the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged” (IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary) • Seamless (Def): • “perfectly consistent and coherent” (WordNet) • “not having or joined by a seam or seams” (WordNet)

  4. Outline • From IDEAS to ATHENA • Motivation – Interoperability • ATHENA Set-up • ATHENA Organizational Approach • ATHENA Technical Approach • ATHENA Results • ATHENA Evaluation

  5. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal From IDEAS to ATHENA

  6. Timeline of Enterprise Interoperability Activities 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 … IDEAS ATHENAPrep ATHENA IP EIC INTEROP Prep INTEROP NoE INTEROP Vlab Enterprise Interoperability Cluster and Enterprise Interoperability Roadmap other research activities

  7. Framework1st Level Framework2nd Level ONTOLOGY QUALITY ATTRIBUTES Semantics Security Scalability Evolution ENTERPR.MODEL Business DecisionalModel BusinessModel BusinessProcesses Knowledge OrganisationRoles SkillsCompetencies QUALITY ATTRIBUTES KnowledgeAssets Performance Availability Portability ARCHITECT Application SolutionManagement WorkplaceInteraction ApplicationLogic ProcessLogic Data ProductData ProcessData KnowledgeData CommerceData Communication IDEAS Interoperability framework Enterprise Model Architecture Semantics

  8. Business Knowledge Semantics ICT Systems Building on IDEAS foundations • IDEAS Interoperability Framework • IDEAS Roadmap as base for identification of Research Challenges • Business layer: business environment and business processes • Knowledge layer: organisational roles, skills and competencies of employees and knowledge assets • ICT Systems layer: applications, data and communication components • Semantics: create mutual understanding on all layers Simplified IDEAS InteroperabilityFramework used in ATHENA

  9. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal Motivation - Interoperability

  10. Situation description – Interoperability • Interoperability is strategically important • Over 90% of CIOs consider Collaboration a “Strategic Necessity” or “Very Important” (AMR Research 2005) • Interoperability is expensive • 30-40% of companies’ IT budget is spent on integration (Gartner and AMR) • $29 billion by 2006 for application integration by IT professional services(Gartner Group, 2003) • Interoperability is time-critical • Integration of single Interface takes 2PM on average • In CPG the #2 to market sells 25% less than #1 • Interoperability is complex • Proliferation of B2B standards – with frequent changes • Fragmented solutions - Islands of interoperability providing Industry or application specific solutions • Wide variety of business network types with different requirements: more stable alliances (e.g. Supply Chains) to more transitory alliances (e.g. virtual organizations) • Interoperability is not a product, it is a characteristic of a system

  11. Challenges in Enterprise System Interoperability Therefore, there is a need to take a fresh look at interoperability and propose an integrated, holistic approach to address this problem. ATHENA is addressing this topic. Community Consensus efforts do not tap their full potential in industry usage Business Incomplete models for value assessment of interoperability projects EnterpriseModelling Capturing Enterprise Knowledge is too time consuming and expensive; no exchange of models; models and reality often not synchronized Processes Processes embedded in application logic; modeling tools mainly for drawing; disjoint B2B process modeling; programmatic integration Services Static definition & usage; current WS standards landscape not interoperable Information Proprietary data formats without semantics, many incompatible standards; hard coded transformations Today‘s situation in integration projects

  12. content standardisation taken from Shai Agassi, SAP FKOM 05 Focus on using interoperability for differentiation Focus on optimizing operation of interoperability technical standardisation

  13. Towards a Process of Interoperability • Starting point is the desire of two enterprises to work together. • Before they are able to work together they have to go through a process to achieve interoperability. Decision to evaluate collaboration Decision to create solution Decision to realize collaboration Decision to go operational Analysis Definition Implementation Operation … … Identify Interoperability Situation Resolve Interoperability Mismatches Implement Interoperability Solution Maintain Interoperability Set-Up GapsIdentified Collaboration Context InteroperableSolution

  14. Approaches for the “Definition” Step Bottom up: Standards, best practices Enterprise A Enterprise B Top down: Enterprise A Enterprise B Collaboration space: Enterprise A Enterprise B

  15. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Set-up

  16. Decomposition of ATHENA Objectives Overall Objective contribution Business Objectives S&T Objectives Strategic Objective Strategic results Business results Technical results achieve Means/ Actions AL A Projects AL B Activities

  17. Business Objectives* • to realise more economic businesses through improvements in efficiency, productivity and cost effectiveness; • to realise more flexible, fluid and nimble businesses which are able to move into new markets and product areas rapidly; • to realise more knowledge-intensive businesses which are based on the wide diffusion and re-use of knowledge assets; • to realise more robust businesses through stable and dependable solutions which are scalable and recoverable; • to realise more valuable businesses from a long term and more general perspective * objectives have been set for the 5 year programme

  18. Scientific and technology objectives* • to define a technologically neutral reference model that provides a stable, generic foundation for specific technical innovations; • to define interoperability requirements for applications, data and communications and provide solutions that meet these requirements; • to provide methods which enterprises can use to manage organisational roles, skills, competencies, and knowledge assets for its own operation and for collaboration with other enterprises; • to provide semantic mediation solutions which enable and support the above; • to provide components of interoperability infrastructures * objectives have been set for the 5 year programme

  19. Strategic Objective* • to establish, become and be recognised in research and industry as a permanent world-class European Hub acting as a reference point in interoperability. * objectives have been set for the 5 year programme

  20. process model interoperability enterprise model interoperability (distributed) Business model generated solutions and work places modeling cross-organizational business processes Enterprise Visual Scenes/Holistic Enterprise Design and Operation business process ontology roles and policies networked EM language\ Unified Paradigm Interoperability Infrastructure Semantic Mapping & Mediation Flexible Enterprise & Process Customisation Support ontology authoring and management Networked Enterprise Operation Support Knowledge Federated Paradigm Interoperability Infrastructure semantic annotation Integrated Paradigm Interoperability Infrastructure Active Models Cross-organizational Business Process Execution Model Driven SoA Service discovery Federated Architectures service description service brokering & mediation service negotiation service orchestration Systems Autonomous Architectures Non-functional Interoperability persistent services year 1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5 Identification of research challenges

  21. Defined Projects and Activities

  22. ATHENA - Consortium Industry Partners Academic / Research Partners Technology Providers University St. Gallen

  23. EnterpriseModeling Business / Economic Research Business ProcessManagement ATHENA Integrated Project Semantics Model-DrivenArchitecture WebServices Involved Research Communities

  24. ATHENA Industry Pilots • AIDIMA • eProcurement in the SME Furniture Industry • CR FIAT • Strategic Sourcing in the Automotive Industry • EADS CCR • Collaborative Product Design in the Aerospace Industry • INTRACOM • Product Portfolio Management in the Telecommunication Equip. Industry • AIAG • Inventory Visibility in the Automotive Industry • CAS • Vehicle Configuration in the Automotive Industry

  25. ATHENA Programme Building Blocks Requirements Research & Technology Development Piloting / Testing B4, B3 B5 A1-A8 Community Building B1,B2,B3, B6,C3

  26. Research RefinedRequirements Validation Requirements Analysis Pilots Scenario Methodology, Guidelines, Reference Architectures “Research Guiding and Evaluation Cycle”

  27. CATS – Cross-Action Line Teams • Created in the first year of ATHENA to improve collaboration between AL A and AL B • Goal to support definition and set-up of the Pilots • Originally 4 CATS have been established • Assigned to pilot • Pilot owner is leading the CATS • AL A representatives

  28. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Organisational Approach

  29. Adapting 1: Implementation Plan Updates • Update in M12 • New Projects planned (A7, A8, A1 Extension) • Improved and adapted the number of deliverables and subproject calls • Update in M24 • reclassification of Deliverables • minor re-allocations of resources and refocusing of projects / activities • Goal: Revisit the DoW, keep it “alive”

  30. Adapting 2: Calls for new project partners • B3 open call • Goal: “contributions in the space of Business Interoperability Framework and Interoperability Impact Assessment” • INSEAD and University of St. Gallen formally joined the ATHENA consortium in M18 • B5-1, B5-2 open calls • Goal of B5-1: Outbound Logistics • Goal of B5-2: Inventory Visibility • Overall 15 proposals received • Review of the proposals by at least two independent reviewers • For B5-1: CAS, AVAG, SMC formally joined the ATHENA Consortium in M25 • For B5-2: AIAG, FOS formally joined the ATHENA Consortium in M25 • Conclusion: worth the effort for the project

  31. Project / Sub-project Schedules M1 M12 M24 M36 “Original” ATHENA A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A1’ Updated Implementation Plan A7 A8 B3 Sub-Proj. B3 Sub Project Call B5 Sub-Proj. 1 B5 Sub Project Calls B5 Sub-Proj. 2 C4’

  32. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Technical Approach

  33. Mismatches prohibit interoperability ATHENA Big Picture – Abstract View Vision:Seamless Interoperability of Business Systems and Applications to enable collaboration Approach: Interoperability must address all aspects of Enterprise collaboration Enterprise A Enterprise B Business Business Processes Semantics Services Information / Data

  34. ATHENA Big Picture - External Views Organization A Organization B ExternalView ExternalView Internal View Internal View public interaction – ensures interoperability by defining a collaboration context private interaction – ensures autonomy of participants

  35. ATHENA Interoperability Reference Architecture (A4)with ATHENA technical solutions to bridge the gap A1 A2 A5 A6 A7 A3 A6 A4 – Interoperability Framework A8 – SME Interoperability in Practice

  36. ATHENA Interoperability Methodology (AIM)

  37. ATHENA Interoperability methodology (AIM)

  38. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Results

  39. Updated ATHENA Key Results (D.C2.2 – M37) Business Results 1 - Business Interoperability Framework 2 - ATHENA Applications in Industry 3 - Interoperability Impact Assessment Strategic Results 4 - Enterprise Interoperability Centre (EIC) 5 - ATHENA Outreach ATHENA: Contribute to enabling enterprises to interoperate. Technical Results 6 - ATHENA Interoperability Framework and Methodology 7 - Collaborative Enterprise Modelling Platform 8 - Cross-Organisational Business Process Modelling and Enactment 9 - Ontology-based Semantic Annotation and Reconciliation method/language/tool 10 - Adaptive and Service Oriented Infrastructure 11 - Model-driven and Adaptable Interoperability Framework

  40. ATHENA Key Results and Contribution Areas Business Results Business Interoperability Interoperability Impact Assessment Model - IIAM Business Interoperability Framework - BIF Industry ATHENA Applications in Industry Strategic Results “Community Building” Policy Policy Action Recommendations Collaborative Enterprise Modelling Community Enterprise Interoperability Center - EIC ATHENA Conference – i-ESA Cross-OrganisationalBusiness Processes Technical Results Provided Required Technology Flexible Execution and Composition of Services EnterpriseModelling EnterpriseModelling Business Document Mgmt. Data Transformation Processes Processes Ontologies and Semantic Model-Driven Development Services Services Information Information

  41. ATHENA Results (D.C2.2 – M37) – Part 1

  42. ATHENA Results (D.C2.2 – M37) – Part 2

  43. ATHENA M36 Final Review 27.-29. March 2007 Madeira, Portugal ATHENA Evaluation

  44. Validation of ATHENA Research Results Scenario Level • Goal: Validate that the Research Results meet the requirements of an application in industry • Carried out on the level of the Pilot • Documented: D.B5.4 (M36) Technical / Research Level • Goal: Validate that the Research Results meet the requirements of the AL A project set out in the beginning • Carried out on the level of the individual AL A project • Documented: D.A1.6.1 (M24), D.A2.5 (M24), WD.A3.2 (M36), D.A4.6 (M36), D.A5.5 (M24), WD.A6.7.1 (M24)

  45. Expectations for Scenario-Level Validation • Research • Goal: Realize a novel research concept as a prototypical implementation / tool • Constraints: Integration with other tools, Usability • Piloting • Goal: Realize an industry use case using multiple tools • Constraint: Industrial users use the tools; Demo Deployment environment • Industry Application • Goal: Realize a business application • Constraint: industry strength and industry level infrastructure / deployment environment

  46. ATHENA Objective was … • … contribute to enabling enterprises to seamlessly interoperate with others or in other words … • “better interoperability” • “better” could mean cheaper, faster, economic to realize a new process, easier, … • B3 and Pilot evaluations show • ATHENA contributes to • easier integration of additional business partners (e.g. CRF) • improved quality of business collaboration (e.g. AIDIMA) • lower cost of set-up of interoperability (e.g. AIAG) • faster set-up of interoperability (e.g. CRF) • realize new business opportunities (e.g. CAS) • lower cost for operation of interoperable solutions (e.g. AIDIMA) • leveraging knowledge for improved decision making (e.g. INTRACOM)

  47. Approaches for the “Definition” Phase Bottom up: INTRACOM CAS CRM Standards, best practices Enterprise A Enterprise B Top down: AIDIMA Documents AIAG CRF Documents Enterprise A Enterprise B EADS infrastructure Collaboration space: CAS Config AIDIMA Process Enterprise A Enterprise B EADS Process CRF Process

  48. content standardisation taken from Shai Agassi, SAP FKOM 05 INTRACOM AIDIMA CRF CAS AIAG EADS technical standardisation

  49. optimize operation of interoperability • reduce time in the set-up phase • enterprise assets are explicitly modelled for later reuse • improvements with respect to robustness possible • understand the business value of interoperability and have a method to improve it Business Objectives* (revisited) • to realise more economic businesses through improvements in efficiency, productivity and cost effectiveness; • to realise more flexible, fluid and nimble businesses which are able to move into new markets and product areas rapidly; • to realise more knowledge-intensive businesses which are based on the wide diffusion and re-use of knowledge assets; • to realise more robust businesses through stable and dependable solutions which are scalable and recoverable; • to realise more valuable businesses from a long term and more general perspective * objectives have been set for the 5 year programme

  50. AIF, Reference Architecture and AIM defined • Industry Scenarios and the DRDS • Tools for modelling of enterprise assets on different abstraction level. • ATHENA Semantic Tool Suite • Full Set of Tool chains addressing different aspects of interoperability Scientific and technology objectives* (revisited) • to define a technologically neutral reference model that provides a stable, generic foundation for specific technical innovations; • to define interoperability requirements for applications, data and communications and provide solutions that meet these requirements; • to provide methods which enterprises can use to manage organisational roles, skills, competencies, and knowledge assets for its own operation and for collaboration with other enterprises; • to provide semantic mediation solutions which enable and support the above; • to provide components of interoperability infrastructures * objectives have been set for the 5 year programme

More Related