Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Optima: a domain-specific model for prioritization and conflicts management in requirements engineering for services intermediaries

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Service Oriented Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

New business models are set up, thanks to Web technologies. In this work, we focus on services intermediary companies. They generate value through the (automatic) selection of third-party services and the (automatic) delivery of the combinations of these services to consumers. Such companies face the problem of deciding which services to select and deliver in order to maximize their profit. The two main paper objectives are (i) to design the generic business model of services intermediaries and (ii) to propose an optimization model. The latter enables to choose the consumer requirements that will be satisfied in order to maximize profit. This model ranks implementable solutions based on various financial aspects. They are related to cost and revenue information that is associated with the requirements. It can support the decision-making process that aims at selecting a profit-maximizing set of requirements for services intermediaries’ system-to-be. Indeed, the proposed model solves the conflicts between requirements and prioritizes the optional requirements. We argue for the relevance of the optimization model via an example and simulations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In order to differentiate two notions commonly called “service” in their respective domains, we call the concept of “service” in the soc an it service, and the business service keeps its short denomination, that is to say service. The latter can be defined as “a change in the condition of a person, or a good belonging to some economic entity, brought about as the result of the activity of some other economic entity [...]” [18].

  2. See the explanations provided by Google at http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/?hl=fr (Last consultation on November \(2012\), the 5th).

  3. The initial model expects that the rank of each keyword varies each week [15]. Given that we use the rank number of Google that we considered as fixed over time, the \(Rank\) variable only depends on the keyword.

  4. Note that the requirements listed in the first row of Table 2 are all optional requirements. See Sect. 6 in which a short comment is made about requirements capturing stakeholders’ preferences.

References

  1. Alenljung B, Persson A (2006) Decision-making activities in requirements engineering decision processes: a case study. In: Nilsson AG, Gustas R, Wojtkowski W, Wojtkowski G, Wrycza S, Zupančič J (eds) In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on information systems development—bridging the gap between academia and industry, 14–17 August 2005. Springer, Karlstad, Sweden, pp 707–718

  2. Bakos Y (1998) The emerging role of electronic marketplaces on the internet. Commun ACM 41(8):35–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bano M, Ikram N (2010) Issues and challenges of requirement engineering in service oriented software development. In: the Fifth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2010). IEEE computer society, pp 64–69

  4. Berander P, Andrews A (2005) Requirements prioritization. In: Aurum A, Wohlin C (eds) Engineering and managing software requirements, Springer, chap 4, pp 69–94

  5. Bieberstein N, Bose S, Fiammante M, Jones K, Shah R (2006) Service-oriented architecture (SOA) compass: business value, planning, and enterprise roadmap. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

  6. Boyle E, Humphreys P, McIvor R (2008) Reducing supply chain environmental uncertainty through e-intermediation: an organisation theory perspective. Int J Prod Econ 114(1):347–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Casati F, Ilnicki S, Jin Lj, Krishnamoorthy V, Shan MC (2000) Adaptive and dynamic service composition in eFlow. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE ’00), Springer-Verlag, pp 13–31

  8. Chaffey D (2007) E-business and E-commerce management, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cheng BH, Atlee JM (2009) Current and future research directions in requirements engineering. In: Lyytinen K, Loucopoulos P, Mylopoulos J, Robinson B (eds) Design requirements engineering: a ten-year perspective (Lecture notes in business information processing), vol 14. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 11–43

  10. Churchill GA, Iacobucci D (2009) Marketing research: methodological foundations, 10th edn. South-Western College, Ohio

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cuaresma MJE, Koch N (2004) Requirements engineering for web applications–a comparative study. J Web Eng 2(3):193–212

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ernst NA, Mylopoulos J, Borgida A, Jureta I (2010) Reasoning with optional and preferred requirements. In: 29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2010) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), vol 6412. Springer, pp 118–131

  13. Felfernig A, Schubert M, Mandl M, Ricci F, Maalej W (2010) Recommendation and decision technologies for requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Recommendation Systems for Software Engineering, ACM Press, pp 11–15

  14. Ghose A, Yang S (2008) An Empirical analysis of sponsored search performance in search engine advertising. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Web Search and Web Data Mining, ACM Press, pp 241–250

  15. Ghose A, Yang S (2009) An empirical analysis of search engine advertising: sponsored search in electronic markets. Manag Sci 55(10):1605–1622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Giaglis GM, Klein S, O’Keefe RM (2002) The role of intermediaries in electronic marketplaces: developing a contingency model. Inf Syst J 12(3):231–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gouscos D, Kalikakis M, Georgiadis P (2003) An approach to modeling Web service QoS and provision price. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, pp 121–130

  18. Hill TP (1977) On goods and services. Rev of Income and Wealth 23(4):315–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacobs S, Kethers S (1994) Improving communication and decision making within quality function deployment. In: Proceedings of the First Conference on Concurrent Engineering Research and Application, Concurrent Technologies Corporation, pp 203–213

  20. Jelassi T, Enders A (2008) Strategies for E-Business: creating value through electronic and mobile commerce, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jureta IJ, Mylopoulos J, Faulkner S (2008) Revisiting the core ontology and problem in requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2008). IEEE Computer Society, pp 71–80

  22. Jureta IJ, Borgida A, Ernst NA, Mylopoulos J (2010) Techne: towards a new generation of requirements modeling languages with goals, preferences, and inconsistency handling. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2010), IEEE Computer Society, pp 115–124

  23. Kalakota R, Whinston AB (1997) Electronic commerce: a manager’s guide. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, Upper Saddle River

  24. Karlsson J, Ryan K (1997) A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Softw 14(5):67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Klein M (1991) Supporting conflict resolution in cooperative design systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 21(6):1379–1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Laffey D (2007) Paid search: the innovation that changed the Web. Bus Horiz 50(3):211–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. van Lamsweerde A (2000) Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’2000), ACM Press, pp 5–19

  28. Lee K, Seda C (2009) Search engine advertising: buying your way to the top to increase sales, 2nd edn. New Riders Press, Berkeley

  29. Lehtola L, Kauppinen M, Kujala S (2004) Requirements prioritization challenges in practice. In: Bomarius F, Iida H (eds) Product focused software process improvement (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 3009. Springer, pp 497–508

  30. Lo A, Yu E (2007) From business models to service-oriented design: a reference catalog approach. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2007) (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 4801. Springer, pp 87–101

  31. Luna ER, Garrigós I, Grigera J, Winckler M (2010) Capture and evolution of web requirements using WebSpec. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Engineering (ICWE 2010) (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 6189. Springer, pp 173–188

  32. Maiden NAM, Ncube C (1998) Acquiring COTS software selection requirements. IEEE Softw 15(2):46–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Liao S, Wang H, Yu ESK (2001) Exploring alternatives during requirements analysis. IEEE Softw 18(1):92–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nuseibeh B, Easterbrook SM (2000) Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering (ICSE 2000)-Future of SE Track. ACM Press, pp 35–46

  35. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2010) Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers, 1st edn. Wiley, New York

  36. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y, Tucci CL (2005) Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 16(1):1–25

    Google Scholar 

  37. Papazoglou MP, Georgakopoulos D (2003) Service-oriented computing. Commun ACM 46(10):24–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Robinson WN, Volkov V (1998) Supporting the negotiation life cycle. Commun ACM 41(5):95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Robinson WN, Pawlowski SD, Volkov V (2003) Requirements interaction management. ACM Comput Surv 35(2):132–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Roy J, Ramanujan A (2001) Understanding web services. IT Prof 3(6):69–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ruhe G, Eberlein A, Pfahl D (2002) Quantitative WinWin: a new method for decision support in requirements negotiation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE 2002), pp 159–166

  42. Rutz OJ, Bucklin RE (2007) A model of individual keyword performance in paid search advertising. Yale University, Technical report

  43. Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process, planning, piority setting. Resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New york

    Google Scholar 

  44. Strigini L (1996) Limiting the dangers of intuitive decision making. IEEE Softw 13(1):101–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sutcliffe AG, Chang WC, Neville R (2003) Evolutionary requirements analysis. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2003), IEEE Computer Society, pp 264–73

  46. The UK Search Engine Marketing Agency (Browser Media) (2009) Bing’s slowly gaining on Google’s market share. Available at: http://www.browsermedia.co.uk/2009/09/24/bings-slowly-gaining-on-googles-mar

  47. Tsai WT (2005) Service-oriented system engineering: a new paradigm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), IEEE Computer Society, pp 3–6

  48. Tsai WT, Jin Z, Wang P, Wu B (2007) Requirement engineering in service-oriented system engineering. In: Proceedings of ICEBE 2007, IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering and the Workshops SOAIC 2007, SOSE 2007, SOKM 2007, IEEE Computer Society, pp 661–668

  49. van Eck P, Wieringa R (2003) Requirements engineering for service-oriented computing: a position paper. In: First International Workshop on e-Services at The 5th International Conference on Electronic Commerce (ICEC’03), TU Delft, pp 23–28

  50. van Lamsweerde A (2009) Requirements engineering: from system goals to UML models to software specifications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wiegers K (2003) Software requirements. Microsoft Press, Redmond

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. PReCISE Research Center, University of Namur, 8 Rempart de la Vierge, 5000 , Namur, Belgium

    Bertrand Verlaine, Ivan J. Jureta & Stéphane Faulkner

Authors
  1. Bertrand Verlaine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivan J. Jureta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane Faulkner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bertrand Verlaine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verlaine, B., Jureta, I.J. & Faulkner, S. Optima: a domain-specific model for prioritization and conflicts management in requirements engineering for services intermediaries. SOCA 8, 175–190 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11761-013-0151-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11761-013-0151-5

Keywords