SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
01-april-2005
,QWHJUDFLMDSRGMHWLM±5HIHUHQþQLPRGHO]DRGORþDQMH
Enterprise integration - Decisional reference model
Unternehmensintegration - Referenz Model zur Entscheidungsunterstützung
Enterprise intégrée - Modele décisionnel de référence
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CEN/TS 14818:2004
ICS:
03.100.01 Organizacija in vodenje Company organization and
podjetja na splošno management in general
SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005 en
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
CEN/TS 14818
SPÉCIFICATION TECHNIQUE
TECHNISCHE SPEZIFIKATION
August 2004
ICS 03.100.01
English version
Enterprise integration - Decisional reference model
This Technical Specification (CEN/TS) was approved by CEN on 9 March 2004 for provisional application.
The period of validity of this CEN/TS is limited initially to three years. After two years the members of CEN will be requested to submit their
comments, particularly on the question whether the CEN/TS can be converted into a European Standard.
CEN members are required to announce the existence of this CEN/TS in the same way as for an EN and to make the CEN/TS available
promptly at national level in an appropriate form. It is permissible to keep conflicting national standards in force (in parallel to the CEN/TS)
until the final decision about the possible conversion of the CEN/TS into an EN is reached.
CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION
EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
Management Centre: rue de Stassart, 36  B-1050 Brussels
© 2004 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. CEN/TS 14818:2004: E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
Contents Page
Foreword.3
Introduction .4
1 Scope .5
2 Normative references .5
3 Terms and definitions .5
4 Abbreviated terms .8
5 The decisional reference model.8
5.1 Overview.8
5.2 Model concepts.9
5.2.1 Decision-making .9
5.2.2 Functional and time categories of decision-making.9
5.2.3 Decision horizon and period .10
5.2.4 Decision level.11
5.2.5 Decision centre .11
5.2.6 Decision frame .11
5.2.7 Performance indicator.12
5.3 Model formalism .13
5.4 Model rules .13
5.5 Grid representation of the decisional reference model.14
6 Conformance.17
Annex A (informative) Guideto using the decisional model .18
A.1 General.18
A.1.1 Participants .18
A.1.2 Approach .18
A.2 Build the model of an existing system .18
A.2.1 General.18
A.2.2 Example — Determination of a long-term production plan for the two years to come (H = 2
years) .20
A.3 Designing a new decisional model of a future system.21
Annex B (informative) Case study — Industrial butterfly floodgates .22
Annex C (informative) Theoretical background .25
C.1 General.25
C.1.1 Arguments from Systems and Control Theory.25
C.1.2 Specific concepts from System Theory .26
Bibliography .27

2

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
Foreword
This document (CEN/TS 14818:2004) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 310, “Advanced
manufacturing technologies”, the secretariat of which is held by BSI.
During its preparation, contributions have also been received from ISO/TC 184/SC5, “Industrial automation
systems and integration/Architecture, communications and integration frameworks”, ISO/TC 184/SC 5 –
IEC/SC 65 A /JWG15, “Enterprise control-system integration”, and the IFAC/IFIP Task Force on Enterprise
Integration.
The concepts, rules and model defined in this document are an implementation of the requirements defined in
ISO 15704. It also constitutes an input for the work on enterprise control system integration being undertaken
by ISO/TC 184/SC 5 – IEC/SC 65 A /JWG15.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
copyrights. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such copyrights.
According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following
countries are bound to announce this Technical Specification: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland
and United Kingdom.
3

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)

Introduction
This document defines the generic concepts and rules in terms of a decisional reference model that are
needed to enable the creation of a particular enterprise decisional model for industrial business and to provide
support for the use of the reference model by industrial enterprises to achieve better enterprise integration.
Enterprise integration can be achieved in various manners and at various levels. It can be obtained by:
a) data (data modelling), in ISO 10303 (STEP) and ISO 15531 (MANDATE);
b) organization (modelling of systems, processes, etc.), as in prEN ISO 19439 (former ENV 40003), prEN ISO
19440 [1] (former ENV 12204);
c) communication (modelling of networks), as in the OSI seven-layer model.
This document addresses the integration as being dealt with by consistent and integrated enterprise-wide
decision-making [2] [3]. The approach is based on and contains selected elements from the GRAI decisional
model.
It is not the intention of this document to suggest users should abandon their own method of handling
decision-making, but to define the set of decisions that are necessary to control production and provide a
structured decision-making environment leading to a better coordination and synchronization of these
decisions.
This document aims at supporting the development of Decisional Hierarchy Model defined in ISO/IEC 62264 –
Enterprise-Control System Integration. It contains definitions and descriptions of the common concepts, rules
and principles necessary to model enterprise-wide decision-making structure, focusing on the production
management and control system. The decisional model defined in this document is a reference model which
is consistent and complementary to: prEN ISO 19439 (revision of ENV 40003), Framework for enterprise
modelling, prEN ISO 19440 (revision of ENV 12204) [1], Language constructs for enterprise modelling, and
ISO 15704, Requirements for enterprise reference architecture and methodologies.
4

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
1 Scope
This document gives guidelines for enterprise integration by using concepts and rules for modelling
enterprise-wide decision-making structures, focusing on the production of management and control systems.
This document does not deal with standard decision processes, or how each individual decision is taken, but
defines an integrated decision-making structure within which decisions are consistently made system-wide.
2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments) applies.
1)
prEN ISO 19439 Enterprise integration - Framework for enterprise modelling - Specification (ISO/FDIS
19439:2004).
ISO 10303-1:1994, Industrial automation systems and integration — Product data representation and
exchange — Part 1: Overview and fundamental principles.
ISO 15531-1, Industrial automation systems and integration — Industrial manufacturing management data —
Part 1: General overview.
ISO 15704:2000, Industrial automation systems — Requirements for enterprise-reference architectures and
methodologies.
IEC 62264–1:2003, Enterprise-control system integration — Part 1 : Models and terminology.
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. Some of the terms defined in
ISO 15704:2000, ISO 15531-1:2000, and prEN ISO 19439:2003 are repeated below for convenience.
NOTE Definitions copied verbatim from other standards are followed by a reference to the source standard in
brackets. Definitions that have been adapted from other standards are followed by an explanatory note.
3.1
activity
part (or all) of functionality that transforms an input to an output using allocated resource(s)
NOTE Adapted from ISO 15704:2000.
3.2
activity cycle
total elapsed time to complete an activity
3.3
decision
result of choosing between different courses of action
[prEN ISO 19439]

1)
To be published
5

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
3.4
decisional activity
activity aimed at making choice
3.5
decision constraint
limitations on values of decision variables
3.6
decision level
set of decisional activities having the same horizon and period
3.7
decision objective
piece of information indicating which types of performances are targeted
NOTE These performances may be the production costs, the delivery lead-time, the level of quality, etc. Objectives
are needed everywhere a decision is made. Global objectives refer to the entire production system and, according to the
1)
principle of coordination are consistently detailed to give local objectives to all decision centres .
3.8
decision variable
item that a decision-maker acts on to make its decisions in order to reach its objectives

1)
Whether the local objectives are actually derived from global objectives or the global objective is derived from local
objectives by way of some form of aggregation or generalization is immaterial; as long as the global objective is valid, the

local objectives are feasible, and the two sets are consistent.
6

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
3.9
decisional
related to those activities or processes that are concerned with making choices
NOTE Adapted from prEN ISO 19439.
3.10
domain
part of the enterprise considered relevant to a given set of business objectives and constraints
for which an enterprise model is to be created
3.11
enterprise
one or more organizations sharing a definite mission, goals and objectives to offer an output such as a
product or service
[ISO 15704:2000]
3.12
enterprise modelling
act of developing an enterprise model
[ISO 15704:2000]
3.13
framework
structure expressed in diagrams, text and formal rules that relates the components of a conceptual entity to
each other
NOTE Adapted from ISO 15704:2000.
3.14
horizon
time interval over which a decision extends
3.15
model
abstract description of reality in any form (including mathematical, physical, symbolic, graphical, or
descriptive) that presents a certain aspect of that reality
NOTE Adapted from ISO 15704:2000.
3.16
performance indicator
aggregated piece of information allowing the comparison of the performance of the system to the system’s
objectives
3.17
period
time interval after which a decision is reviewed
3.18
product
finished good or a sub assembly, part or raw material
3.19
production control
function of monitoring and controlling the movement of goods through the entire manufacturing cycle
7

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
[ISO 15531-1:2000]
3.20
production planning
function of setting appropriate levels or limits to the future manufacturing operations according to sales
forecast, economic constraints and resource requirements and availability
NOTE Adapted from ISO 15531-1:2000.
3.21
reference model
general or generic model representing common characteristics of systems of a given class.
NOTE The model gives the generic structure of the system to be studied.
3.22
resource
any device, tool and means at the disposal of the enterprise to produce goods or services
[ISO 15531-1:2000]
NOTE Resources as they are defined here include human resources considered as specific means with a given
capability and a given capacity.
3.23
structure
definition of the relationships among the components of an organization
[ISO 15704:2000]
3.24
system
collection of real-world items organized for a given purpose
[ISO 15704:2000]
4 Abbreviated terms
GERAM Generic Enterprise Reference Architecture and Methodologies
GRAI Graph of Results and Activities Interrelated
IFAC International Federation of Automatic Control
IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
5 The decisional reference model
5.1 Overview
A reference model is a common structure in a given domain. Namely, it is a form of “skeleton” to be further
developed to obtain the model of a system in that domain. A reference model may be considered as a
technical specification. It is possible to measure the difference between the reference model and the models.
It can also be considered as a basic model in a given domain, i.e. as a generic model which needs for each
new case in that domain, an adaptation or a particularization.

8

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
The decisional reference model defines a generic integrated decision system structure in terms of a set of
decision centres and decision links. It is a common structure for integrated decision-making in the domain of
production planning and control. It serves as a basis to elaborate the decisional model of a particular system.
5.2 Model concepts
5.2.1 Decision-making
The term “decisional” relates to “those activities or processes that are concerned with making choices”; the
decision itself is “the result of choosing between different courses of action”. The activity to make decisions
consists of choosing from amongst a set of known alternatives (variables) the one which meets best the
objective within constraints.
5.2.2 Functional and time categories of decision-making
5.2.2.1 Functional categories
Decision-making activities are classified into functional categories depending on the basic items they handle
[Products (P), Resources (R) and Time (T)]. The different combinations of these lead to a categorization as
follows (also see Figure 1):
 “manage products” (e.g. finished goods, sub-assemblies, parts and raw materials). This is concerned with
the management of products in the time domain (P ∩ T). Major decisions of this category are concerned
with what, when and in what quantity those products are to be procured and which levels of inventory are
appropriate;
 “manage resources” (e.g. information technology and manufacturing technology resources as well as
humans). It deals with the management of resources in the time domain (R ∩ T). Major decisions of this
category are concerned with the management of the capacity of the resources;
 “plan production” (e.g. master schedule, shop floor scheduling, etc.). These decisions are concerned with
production planning that synchronizes the flow of products via the resources in the time domain
(P ∩ R ∩ T).
9

---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)

P x R x T
pR
P x T
T
R x T

Figure 1 — Three basic decision-making domains
5.2.2.2 Time categories
Decisions are classified into three general basic time horizons:
 long-term and broad scope. These are long-term decisions that are concerned with the definition of
objectives consistent with the global objectives of the enterprise;
 medium-term and intermediate scope. These are medium-term decisions that deal with the
implementation of means (both human and machine resources) to meet the objectives defined at the
long-term horizon;
 short-term and limited scope. This is a short-term horizon associated with planning and execution of
actions, using the means defined at the medium-term time horizon, to reach the objectives of the long-
term horizon.
5.2.3 Decision horizon and period
5.2.3.1 Horizon
A horizon is the part of the future taken into account by a decision, i.e. the horizon is six months when a
decision is taken on a time interval of six months. The notion of horizon is closely related to the concept of
planning. Thus the notion of “horizon” is also very close to the notion of term (long-term, short-term, etc.) but is
more precise because a horizon is quantified. In industrial production systems, horizons are directly valuated
in relation to the customer order lead-time, the material requirements cycle times, the manufacturing cycle.
5.2.3.2 Period
The notion of period is closely related to the concept of control and adjustment. When a decision has been
made to carry out some activity or activities during a subsequent horizon, based on an objective, the
execution of these activities needs to be monitored. The intermediary results obtained need to be measured
with respect to the objective before this activity is completely finished and the horizon has run out. If the
measurements show that there is a deviation with reference to the objective, adjustments should be made. A
period is the time that passes after a decision when this decision shall be re-evaluated
EXAMPLE: A three-month plan may be re-evaluated and decided upon every two weeks, e.g. the horizon is three months
and the period is two weeks.
10

---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
The concept of period allows the manager to take into account the changes in the environment of the decision
system. These changes can come from the internal behaviour of the system (disturbances, machine
breakdowns) and from outside (new customer orders arrive, problems arise related to providers).
5.2.4 Decision level
A decision level is an abstract concept used to represent decision-making hierarchy. It is defined by a pair of
values for horizon and period (H,P). At a given decision level, all decisions made will have the same pair of
values for horizon and period.
A particular decision level may be mapped to one of the three basic time categories (long-term, medium-term,
and short-term).
5.2.5 Decision centre
The decision centre is an abstract concept used to represent the intersection of a decision level and a
functional domain. Decision centres are mapped onto an enterprise organization hierarchy for identifying the
people responsible for making various decisions. A decision centre is defined as the set of decisions made at
one level and belonging to one decision function. Decision centres are the “locations” where decisions are
made about the various objectives and goals that the system should reach and about the means available to
operate consistently with these objectives and goals. To manage a system, many decision centres operate
concurrently, each with its own dynamics reflecting the various time-scales and dynamic requirements that
management decisions need to address. To co-ordinate and synchronize decision-makings, decision links
(decision frames) and feedbacks should relate decision centres together.
5.2.6 Decision frame
5.2.6.1 Decision frame content
A decision frame describes a set of items that constrain the degrees of freedom for the decision-making. This
frame will not be modified by a decision that has already been made. To avoid conflicts, a decision centre (or
a decision-maker) should be under the influence of only one decision frame.
The main items influencing the decision-making are:
— decision objective or set of objectives the decision has to meet (5.2.6.2);
— decision variables enabling the decision-maker to know what may be acted on and under what constraints
(5.2.6.3);
— decision criteria guiding the choice of the decision-making (5.2.6.4).
The main items that make up the frames of decision-making are primarily determined by the hierarchy of the
decision system. These items are decomposed in a consistent way by descending through the hierarchy of
the system. Hence, through the decision frame, a decision centre transmits to another decision centre the
objectives, the decision variables, the constraints and criteria that this last decision centre should take into
account when making decisions.
There exist two basic types of structure defined by decisional links (decision frame): types A and B as shown
in Figure 2. Structure Type A emphasizes the coordination between various levels, while type B emphasizes
the synchronization between various functions. The choice of structure depends on the organizational
objective of the enterprise.
11

---------------------- Page: 13 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
Manage Manage Manage Manage
Plan Plan
products resources products resources
Structure type A Structure type B

Figure 2 — Structures of decisional links
5.2.6.2 Decision objective
Objectives indicate which types of performances are targeted. These performances may be the production
costs, the delivery lead-time, the level of quality, for example. Objectives are needed everywhere and every
time a decision is made. Global objectives refer to the entire production system and, according to the principle
of coordination, are consistently detailed to give local objectives to all decision centres.
NOTE The main purpose of enterprise control is to ensure that operational activities run in a consistent way and that
objectives coming from the upper level (corporate strategy) are correctly understood and implemented. For that purpose,
control is on the one hand to co-ordinate tasks in relation to these objectives and to enable the deployment of these
objectives within the company and, on the other hand, to follow up the performance of activities in order to compare them
to objectives.
5.2.6.3 Decision variable
Decision variables are the items upon which a decision centre can make decisions that allow it to reach its
objectives.
EXAMPLE: For scheduling workers’ working hours, a decision variable could be “the number of extra work hours”, e.g. the
decision frame of scheduling declares that scheduling decisions may decide upon the value of extra working hours in
order to reach the objective of scheduling.
A decision centre may act upon one or more decision variables through determining their respective values. In
other words, decisions are made in a decision space. The dimension of a decision space is the number of
decision variables.
5.2.6.4 Decision constraint
Constraints are the limitations on possible values of variables. Decision constraints limit the freedom of a
decision centre to select any arbitrary value for its decision variables.
5.2.7 Performance indicator
A performance indicator is an aggregated piece of information allowing the comparison of the performance of
the system to the system’s objectives. A performance indicator may be defined by its name, a value domain or
dimension and a procedure that describes how its value can be calculated.
12

---------------------- Page: 14 ----------------------

CO-ORDINATION
SIST-TS CEN/TS 14818:2005
CEN/TS 14818:2004 (E)
Performance indicators should be consistent with objectives because it is necessary to compare
performances targeted (objectives) and performances reached (indicators). Performance indicators should
also be consistent with decision variables because these will have an effect on the performance monitored
(controllability). The main issue is to ensure internal consistency inside a decision centre in terms of the triplet
presented (see Figure 3). This consistency is ensured if the performance indicators allow verification of the
achievement of the objective and are influenced by actions on decision variables.
Objectives
CONSISTENCY
Perfomances
Decision variables
indicators

Figure 3 — Consistency of the {Objectives, Variables, Performance Indicators} triplet
5.3 Model formalism
The decisional model is represented by a grid (see Figure 4). Rows represent decision levels and columns
signify decision domains (functions). The intersection between a row and a column is a decision centre. As
shown in Figure A.2, there are two types of links between decision centres: information link (simple arrow) and
decisional link (double arrow).
Manage Plan Manage
products production resources
Level n + 1
SYNCHRONIZATION
Level n
Level n -1

Figure 4 — Decisional model formalism
5.4 Model rules
Based on the practical experiences of applying GRAI methodology, the following model rules summarize good
practice:
— a decisional model sho
...