Concept Model vs. Data Model
John Zachman says you can (and probably should) develop each of the following three kinds of artifacts to “excruciating level of detail”.
1. For the business management’s perspective (row 2), a conceptual model (roughly CIM in OMG terms).
2. For the architect’s perspective (row 3), a business logic design (roughly PIM in OMG terms).
3. For the engineer’s perspective (row 4), a class-of-platform design (roughly PSM in OMG terms).
Because each is a different kind of model, there is a transform from one to the next. One implication is that it is possible to make a clear distinction between analysis (CIM) and design (PIM).
Another implication is that concept models and logical data models are clearly distinct. Unfortunately, many people blur the line between them. That’s wrong.
- A concept model is about the meaning of the words you use, and the business statements you make assuming those meanings. It’s about communication.
- A logical data model is about how you organize what you think you know about the world so it can be recorded and logically manipulated in a systematic way.
Tags: analysis vs design, CIM vs PIM vs PSM, concept model, concept model vs. data model, conceptual data model, conceptual model, data model, logical data model, Zachman, Zachman Architecture Framework
Ronald G. Ross
Ron Ross, Principal and Co-Founder of Business Rules Solutions, LLC, is internationally acknowledged as the “father of business rules.” Recognizing early on the importance of independently managed business rules for business operations and architecture, he has pioneered innovative techniques and standards since the mid-1980s. He wrote the industry’s first book on business rules in 1994.
Tom Hussey
| #
Yes, tracability between the two different models is very important. If you can’t connect concepts to the logical data model then it’s analogous to saying that the business stakeholder can’t talk to the architect because there’s no common frame of reference.