SimplexIS: Evaluating the Impact of e-Gov Simplification Measures in the Information System Architecure

Authors: Bruno Félix, André Vasconcelos, José Tribolet

Abstract:

Nowadays increasingly the population makes use of Information Technology (IT). As such, in recent year the Portuguese government increased its focus on using the IT for improving people-s life and began to develop a set of measures to enable the modernization of the Public Administration, and so reducing the gap between Public Administration and citizens.Thus the Portuguese Government launched the Simplex Program. However these SIMPLEX eGov measures, which have been implemented over the years, present a serious challenge: how to forecast its impact on existing Information Systems Architecture (ISA). Thus, this research is focus in addressing the problem of automating the evaluation of the actual impact of implementation an eGovSimplification and Modernization measures in the Information Systems Architecture. To realize the evaluation we proposes a Framework, which is supported by some key concepts as: Quality Factors, ISA modeling, Multicriteria Approach, Polarity Profile and Quality Metrics

Keywords: Information System Architecture, Evaluation, eGov Simplification measure, Multicriteria Evaluation

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1081395

References:

[1] Secretária de Estado da Modernização Administrativa.simplex'10 - Quanto mais simples, melhor. Lisboa : s.n., 2010. Programa SIMPLEX 2010.
[2] Clements, P., Kazman, R. e Klein, M.Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. s.l. : Addison-Wesley, 2002. pp. 19-34, 109-120. ISBN 0-201-70482-X.
[3] What Makes A Goode Data Model? Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models. Moody, D. e Shanks, G. s.l. : P. LOUCOPOLIS, December, 1998, International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, pp. 14-17.
[4] Metrics for Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models.Moody, Daniel. Austrália : s.n., 1998, Springer, pp. 221-225.
[5] The Deming Way: Total Quality Management for Software. Zultner, R. Washington : s.n., 1992, Total Quality Management for Software Conference, pp. 134-145.
[6] IEEE-1471.Recommended Pratice for Architectural Description for Software-Intensive Systems. 2000.
[7] Characteristics of software quality. Boehm, B., et al., et al.North Holland : s.n., 1978.
[8] Vasconcelos, André.Arquitecturas dos Sistemas de Informa├º├úo: Representa├º├úo e Avalia├º├úo. Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa. 2007. Tese de Doutoramento em Eng. Inform├ítica e de Computadores.
[9] Enterprise Architecture Analysis: An Information System Evaluation Approach. Vasconcelos, André, Sousa, Pedro e Tribolet, José. 2, 2008, International Journal of Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, Vol. 3. ISSN 1860-6059.
[10] Costa, Pedro.SimplexIS - Avalia├º├úo do impacto das medidas SIMPLEX na Arquitectura dos Sistemas de Informa├º├úo. Instituto Superior Técnico. Lisboa : s.n., 2010. Tese de Mestrado.
[11] Costa, C., Corte, J., Vansnick, J., Costa, J., Chagas, M., Correa, E., Joao, I., Lopes, F., Lourenco, J., Sanchez-.M-Macbeth - Guia do Utilizador. 2005.
[12] Redefining Business - IT ALignment Through a Unified Framework. Maes, R., Rijsenbrij, D. e Truijens, O. Maio 200, Prima Vera Working Paper, Vol. 17.
[13] Information System Architectures: Representation, Planning and Evaluation. Vasconcelos, A., Sousa, P. e Tribolet, J. 6, 2003, Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Vol. 1, pp. 78-84.
[14] Sparx Systems.Enterprise Architect - Enterprise Architect User Guide. 2011.
[15] The Open Group.TOGAF Version 9: The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF). 2009.
[16] A Proposed Adaptable Quality Model for Software Quality Assurance. Khaddaj, Souheil e Horgan, Gerard. London : s.n., 2005, Journal of Computer Sciences, Vol. 1 (4), pp. 481-486. ISSN 1549-3636.
[17] The Evaluation of Software Quality Factors in Very Large Information Systems. Khaddaj, Souheil e Horgan, G. London : s.n., 2004, Electronic Journal of Information System Evaluation, Vol. 7, pp. 43-48.