Review of
Value-Driven
Service Matching
method
Ai, W.
MBI - Group 1
Faculty of Science – Utrecht University
28-03-2013
Introduction
The Value-Driven Service Matching method (Gordijn, Kinderen & Wiernga, 2008) is designed to aid
Business-IT Alignment (Wieringa, Gordijn & Eck, 2005) within telecom organizations. Nowadays, ICT
products and services are often combined and delivered by the telecom companies, the difference
between them are weakened. This method helps to improve the matching process of consumer’s
demands and the available products/services provided by one or multiple telecom companies more
precisely and optimally.
This document presents an example of the Value-Driven Service Matching method, a
Process-Deliverable Diagram (Weerd & Brinkkemper, 2008) derived from this it and the related
literatures regarding to the subject. Additional information such as templates of CONSEQUENCE
LIST and the final deliverable SERVICE BUNDLE can be found in the Appendix.
2
Example of Value-Driven Service Matching
In Figure 1, pre-defined service catalogues of two suppliers, ‘Supplier A’ and ‘Supplier B’ are briefly
presented. These two service catalogues display the services that they provide.
Figure 1: Pre-defined service catalogues of Supplier A (left) and Supplier B (right)
Notation description of Service catalogue
Notation
Description
Bolded rectangle
It represents a supplier (supplier name is located in the
right bottom corner of a supplier)
Round cornered rectangle
Service provided by a supplier
In coming triangle
Received service or benefit
Outgoing triangle
Provided service or benefit
Bold line between services
Business or technical constraint
Rectangle
Quality of the service
Dotted line between service and quality
It indicates that which service a quality belongs to
Initial stage
The example is described as consumer wants to have internet access in his new apartment, for casual
use as well as maintaining websites as a part of his standby action for work during the weekends.
Step 1: Elaborate desired consequences
-
Identify wants
The matching process begins with seeking one or more wants from the consumer. Initial wants of the
consumer are stated as “Internet access for casual usage” and “maintain websites at home for standby
actions from work”.
-
Identify desired consequences that motivate the wants
CONSEQUENCEs can be derived from the identified wants. In this case, the consumer wants a decent
internet connection at home for both casual use and work, it can be summarized as internet access of
mid-ranged bandwidth.
3
-
Prioritize consequences
The consumer assigns priority to each of the CONSEQUENCE derived from previous step using a
MoSCoW-list (Beynon-Davies, Carne, Mackay, & Tudhope, 1999), additional process involved is
described in Reasoning about Substitute Choices and Preference Ordering in e-Services (Kinderen &
Gordijn, 2008). But from previous step, there is only one consequence found, which has also the
highest priority set by the consumer.
-
Add consequence
CONSEQUNCEs with high priority are to be added to the CONSEQUNCE LIST for further use, in this
case internet access of mid-ranged bandwidth is added to the CONSEQUENCE LIST. An example of
CONSEQUENCE LIST can be found in Appendix A.
-
Archive consequence
When the priority of a CONSEQUENCE is mid or low, it is to be transferred to this sub-process, the
outcome of this sub-process is not specified in the paper nor relevant in this context.
-
Elaborate wants
The consumer might want more than just the initial idea he has in his mind, additional offers can now
be made. Logically, if the consumer wants to have internet access at home, he may also find mobile
internet service interesting while traveling. The consumer agreed to take this service into consideration.
This Elaborated want needs to be evaluated by Prioritize consequences. As the result, consumer
choose to have an average mobile internet access service. After this, the consumer has no further
interests in other products/services provided by the suppliers.
Step 2: Identify benefits and the services that contain them
-
Consult service catalogues
The service catalogues (Figure 1) need to be used for deriving available services from suppliers and
the services are added to SERVICE (deliverable).
-
Match services with consequences
The CONSEQUENCEs now need to match with available services on the market by. For instance,
consequence internet access of mid-ranged bandwidth matches with service ‘Internet access – data
communication’ that has service properties of bandwidth-up = 512Kbps / bandwidth-down = 1Mbps
and latency = 40ms from Supplier A. Additionally, during Step 1: Elaborate desired consequences Elaborate wants the consumer also indicates an average mobile internet access service as another
CONSEQUENCE; this CONSEQUENCE matches ‘Mobile internet access – mobile data
communication’ with property data volume 500MB from Supplier B. The result formulizes the
MATCHING RESULT (deliverable).
Step 3: Construct service bundles
-
Apply supplier-side constraints
By applying the supplier-side constraint (Baida, 2006) indicated in Figure 1 (the solid line drawn
between service Internet access and TV Cable), Supplier A cannot provide internet access service to
consumer without providing the TV Cable service due to a technical constraint. Supplier B will provide
the mobile internet access to the consumer. This supplier-side constraint is added to SUPPLIER-SIDE
CONSTRAINT (deliverable).
4
-
Finalize service bundle
Based on the desired service(Internet access – Supplier A), technical constraint (TV Cable – Supplier A)
and additional service (Mobile internet access – Supplier B), an e3value model is created (in Figure 2).
The explanation and template of SERVICE BUNDLE can be found in Appendix B.
Figure 2: e3value model of service bundle
5
Process-Deliverable Diagram
Value-Driven Service Matching
Additional statements:
Service catalogues mentioned in this method are predefined, and will be used as input source which contains
available services provided by suppliers and supplierside constraints.
Elaborate desired
Consequences
Identify wants
CONSUMER’S WANT
1 .. *
is described in
1 .. *
Identify desired consequences
CONSEQUENCE
Prioritize consequences
Archive
consequence
ID
Priority
[else]
1 .. *
[if priority is high]
1
Add consequence
CONSEQUENCE LIST
1
Elaborate wants
[else]
[if consequences
are settled]
is input for
intermediary party
SERVICE
Identify services and
Suppliers
Consult service catalogues
1 .. *
Service name
Supplier
1 .. *
Match services with
consequences
intermediary party
Construct service
Bundles
MATCHING RESULT
1 .. *
SUPPLIER-SIDE
CONSTRAINT
Constraint name
Constraint type
Provides
information to
0 .. *
Apply supplier-side constraints
1
Finalize service bundle
SERVICE BUNDLE
1
intermediary party
6
PDD description
On the left-hand side of the PDD above, all processes, data flows and control flows are listed. These
notations are based on the activity diagram in UML. The right-hand side are the deliverables based on
the class diagram of UML (OMG, 2003). Activities are connected with dotted arrows to the produced
deliverables (Weerd et al., 2008)
An additional statement describes the condition of using this method. “Service catalogues” (an
example is shown in Figure 1) must be defined beforehand. The “Service catalogues” contain the
available services provided by one or multiple suppliers, they may also contain business or technical
oriented constraints, which are called “supplier-side constraints” (Baida, 2006) in this method.
Step 1: Elaborate desired consequences
Sub-step 1.1: Identify wants
Input: An initial request from consumer (via telephone or e-mail for example)
Output: CONSUMER’S WANT
Description: Identify CONSUMER’S WANT from the stated consumer’s need
Sub-step 1.2: Identify desired consequences
Input: CONSUMER’S WANT
Output: CONSEQUENCE
Description: Translate CONSUMER’S WANT into terms of CONSEQUENCEs that motivate wants.
Sub-step 1.3: Prioritize consequences
Input: CONSEQUNCE
Output: Priority
Description: Consumer assigns a priority to each of the found CONSEQUENCE, all
CONSEQUENCEs must be prioritized again by applying MoSCoW-list (Beynon-Davies et al., 1999)
and Substitute Choices and Preference Ordering in e-Services (Kinderen et al., 2008). Depending on
the priority, the CONSEQUENCE is either added to CONSEQUENCE LIST (priority: ‘high’) or
transferred to Archive consequence sub-process.
Sub-step 1.4a: Add consequence
Input: CONSEQUNCE with high priority
Output: CONSEQUNCE LIST
Description: CONSEQUNCEs with high priority are to be added to the CONSEQUENCE LIST for
further use.
7
Sub-step 1.4b: Archive consequence
Input: CONSEQUENCE with mid or low priority
Output: Not relevant in this context
Description: CONSEQUENCEs with mid or low priority are processed in this sub-process, the
outcome of it is not illustrated in the paper nor relevant to this context.
Sub-step 1.5: Elaborate wants
Input: upon completion of sub-step 1.4a or 1.4b
Output: N/A
Description: advises additional offers that might be interesting to the consumer; if an offer is accepted
by the consumer, it must to be evaluated by sub-step 1.3 Prioritize Consequences. If all consequences
are prioritized and settled, the intermediary party can proceed to the next activity: Identify services and
suppliers; else, 1.3 Prioritize consequences needs to be re-executed so that all consequences receive
appropriate priorities.
Step 2: Identify services and supplier
Sub-step 2.1: Consult service catalogues
Input: pre-defined “Service catalogues”
Output: SERVICE
Description: Consult the pre-defined “Service catalogues”, derive all available services described in
the “Service catalogues”.
Sub-step 2.2: Match services with consequences
Input: CONSEQUNCE LIST & SERVICE
Output: MATCHING RESULT
Description: Matching CONSEQUENCEs from CONSEQUENCE LIST with the SERVICEs provided
by one or more suppliers in order to create a desired scenario for the consumer.
Step 3: Construct service bundles
Sub-step 3.1: Apply supplier-side constraints
Input: pre-defined “Service catalogues”
Output: SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINT
Description: Derive the SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRANT from the pre-defined “Service catalogues”
and apply it to the MATCHING RESULT.
Sub-step 3.2: Finalize service bundle
Input: MATCHING RESULT & SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINT
Output: SERVICE BUNDLE
Description: Create the final deliverable SERVICE BUNDLE based on the MATCHING RESULT and
SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINT.
8
Activity table
Activity
Sub activity
Description
Role
Elaborate
Identify wants
The starting point of this method, it is to find the
Intermediary
desired
CONSUMER’S WANT, derived from a stated consumer
party
consequences
need (Gordijn et al., 2008).
Identify desired
It is used to derive the CONSUMER’S WANTs into terms
Intermediary
consequences
of CONSEQUENCEs. During the execution of this
party
that motivate the
sub-activity, constraints have to be applied, to check
wants
whether one CONSEQUENCE conflicts another (Gordijn
et al., 2008).
Prioritize
This sub activity sets the prioritizations of
Intermediary
consequences
CONSEQUNCEs according to consumer’s wish by
party
applying MoSCoW-list (Beynon-Davies et al., 1999) and
Reasoning about Substitute Choices and Preference
Ordering in e-Services (Kinderen et al., 2008).
Add
This sub-process adds CONSEQUENCEs with high
Intermediary
consequence
priority to the CONSEQUENCE LIST.
party
Archive
In this sub-activity, the CONSEQUENCEs that have mid
Intermediary
consequence
or low priorities assigned are to be archived. In the
party
original paper, this sub-activity was not mentioned, but it
seems to be logical of including such activity in the PDD.
Elaborate wants
Additional offers are being made here. Once accepted by
Intermediary
the consumer, the additional offers are to be prioritized
party
again in the previous sub activity Prioritize consequences
(Gordijn et al., 2008).
Identify
Consult service
Retrieve the available SERVICEs provided by various
Intermediary
benefits and the
catalogues
suppliers based on the pre-defined service catalogues
party
services that
(Gordijn et al., 2008). Examples of pre-defined service
contain them
catalogues are shown in Figure 1.
Match services
Match the CONSEQUENCEs with the available
Intermediary
with
SERVICEs provided by suppliers (Gordijn et al., 2008).
party
consequences
Construct
Apply
Derive the SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINTs indicated in
Intermediary
service bundle
supplier-side
the service catalogues and apply them to the MATCHING
party
constraints
RESULT (Gordijn et al., 2008). In Figure 1, an example
of SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINT is indicated by a
solid line between 2 services.
Finalize service
The final step of this method, the processed information is
Intermediary
bundle
now sufficient to formulate and finalize the SERVICE
party
BUNDLE (Gordijn et al., 2008).
9
Concept table
Concept
Description
CONSUMER’S WANT
CONSUMER’S WANT is a statement derived from a stated consumer need, described in non-technical terms (Gordijn et al., 2008).
CONSEQUENCE
CONSEQUENCE is a net positive valuation for the consumer. A priority is assigned later to every CONSEQUNCE based on the
consumer’s wish (Gordijn et al., 2008).
CONSEQUENCE LIST
CONSEQUNCE LIST is a collection of CONSEQUNCEs that have high priority assigned to them (Gordijn et al., 2008). The
explanation and template are listed in the Appendix A.
SERVICE
Available SERVICEs from one or more suppliers derived from the pre-defined service catalogues (Gordijn et al., 2008).
MATCHING RESULT
It is the result of matching desired consequences and available services provided by suppliers. Matching result is not specifically
elaborated in Value-Driven Service Matching method (Gordijn et al., 2008), it is implied as a data flow between 2 sub activities.
However, it is helpful to prevent further confusions in the PDD created in this document, and is therefore described in the PDD as a
deliverable.
SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINT
Business or technical constraint (Baida, 2006) derived from the pre-defined service catalogues (Gordijn et al., 2008).
SERVICE BUNDLE
At last, after applying the SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRAINTs (an example can be found in Figure 1) to the MATCHING RESULT, a
e3value based SERVICE BUNDLE is created (Gordijn et al., 2008). It will be presented to both parties, the consumer and supplier for
further evaluation (Gordijn & Akkermans, 2001a). A sample service bundle is shown in Figure 2, the explanation and template are
listed in the Appendix B.
10
Related literatures
Origin
This service matching method is a part of the development of VITAL-project (Gordijn & Akkermans,
2005). The project investigates an economic value-based approach to alignment between business and
ICT of large telecom companies. It consists of three parts, all three parts are build upon the e3value
method (Gordijn & Akkermans, 2001b). This method was introduced back in 2001. During the past 12
years, they have developed an entire e3 family focusing on various aspects such as value, control,
strategy, and alignment of e-business (Gordijn, 2001a). Gordijn and Akkermans (2003) described the
e3value method as “Our methodology exploits a requirements engineering way of working, but
employs concepts and terminology from business science, marketing and axiology”.
Position
There are not many ICT service matching methods that are specially designed for telecommunication
field. However, there is a paper presented by Wang and Xu (2012) which referred to the bundling
aspect of Value-Driven Service Matching method. In their paper, they illustrated a sharing-oriented
service matching where the concept of service bundling played an essential role. Additionally, a group
of researchers have also introduced a concept of service tailoring towards personalized homecare
systems (Zarifi Eslami, Zarghami, Sapkota & Sinderen, 2010), which elaborated the demand – supply
matching concept in different approaches.
Application
A case study can be found in this paper. The scenario begins with a consumer who wants to
communicate with family overseas at a low cost; the consumer has an idea of using VoIP as one of the
options. Applying the three-step process of this method. The CONSUMER’S WANTs are being
identified and derived into CONSEQUENCEs. After prioritization, a CONSEQUENCE LIST is being
formulated. In step 2, the pre-defined service catalogues must be consulted to determine which of the
available SERVICEs can match the CONSEQUNCEs. In the final step, SUPPLIER-SIDE
CONSTRAINTs from the service catalogues need to be applied. For example, in this case study, KPN
is not able to provide the VoIP SERVICE separately without regular telephone service due to their
SUPPLIER-SIDE CONSTRANT (technical). Based on the selected SERVICEs, an e3value model
based SERVICE BUNDLE that represent the network of consumer and supplier(s) can be build. This
introduces a final decision making process for the supplier as well as the consumer (Gordijn et al.,
2001a).
This method has also been successfully applied in other fields including entertainment, news, banking,
trade documents and energy supply (Gordijn, 2001b).
11
Reference
Baida, Z. (2006). Software-aided Service Bundling – Intelligent Methods & Tools for Graphical
Service Modeling. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
Beynon-Davies, P., Carme, C., Mackay, H. & Tudhope, D. (1999). Rapid application development
(RAD): an empirical review. European Journal of Information Systems, 8(3), 211–223.
Gordijn, J. (2001a). e3family is a set of ontological approaches for modeling networked value
constellations. e3value. Retrieved February 20, 2013, from http://e3value.few.vu.nl/e3family/
Gordijn, J. (2001b). Success stories on e3value; case studies and results. e3value. Retrieved February
20, 2013, from http:// http://e3value.few.vu.nl//testimonials/successstories/
Gordijn, J. & Akkermans, H. (2001a). E3-value: Design and evaluation of e-business models. IEEE
Intelligent Systems, 16(4), 11–17.
Gordijn, J. & Akkermans, H. (2001b). A Conceptual Value Modeling Approach for e-Business
Development. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Knowledge Capture, Workshop
Knowledge in e-Business, Victoria, BC, Canada, 29-36.
Gordijn, J. & Akkermans, H. (2003). Value-based requirements engineering: exploring innovative
e-commerce ideas. Requirements Engineering, 8(2), 114-134.
Gordijn, J., Kinderen, de., S. & Wieringa, R. (2008). Value-driven service matching. Proceedings of
16th IEEE international requirements engineering conference, Catalunya, Spain,67–70.
Kinderen, de., S. & Gordijn, J. (2008). Reasoning about substitute choices and preference ordering in
e-services. E3-value: Design and Evaluation of e-Business Models. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from
http://www.e3value.com/bibquery/?key=VoIPCaseStudy2008.
Wang, Z., Xu, X. (2012). A sharing-oriented service selection and scheduling approach for the
optimization of resource utilization. Service Oriented Computing and Applications, 6(1), 15-32.
Wieringa, R., Gordijn, J. & Eck, van., P. (2005). Value-Based Business-IT Alignment in Networked
Constellations of Enterprises. REBNITA ’05: Proceedings of 1st International Workshop on
Requirements Engineering for Business Need and IT Alignment. Paris, France.
Weerd, van de., I. & Brinkkemper, S. (2008). Meta-Modeling for Situational Analysis and Design
Methods (pp. 38–58). Hersey: Idea Group publishing.
12
Zarifi Eslami, M., Zarghami, A., Sapkota, B., Sinderen, M. van. (2010). Service tailoring: Towards
personalized homecare systems. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Architecture,
Concepts and Technologies for Service Oriented Computing, Athens, Greece, 109-121.
13