**4.1 The strategic orientation level**

As already explained (**Table 1**), there is several time milestones organising this level. Upstream, there is the existing state, corresponding to the system as it is now (as-is). Downstream, there is the target that is the representation of the system as we would like it to be at the strategic horizon, assuming that no significant element of the environment would change between now and then (could-be). The target is therefore positioned at the furthest point in the future at which it is possible to make assumptions about the system. In between, steps are distributed at regular intervals (strategic period). In theory, the number of steps is equal to the strategic horizon divided by the strategic period. The steps correspond to the moments when the trajectory to be followed is questioned.

All these milestones express the system in terms of performances. As explained above, that means that the system is positioned in a performances space.

The three main activities implemented at this level are as follows.


**Figure 6** summarises these activities.

*Model-Based Enterprise Continuous Improvement DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96856*

**Figure 6.**

*The activities of the strategic orientation level.*

The definition of the trajectory and, therefore, of the steps that constitute it, is not a simple task for two main reasons. Firstly, it can be difficult to translate the key success factors, often expressed in general terms, into operational objectives i.e., objectives that are valued and translatable into actions. Secondly, the performance space is not accessible in its entirety. The reason for this could be:


### **4.2 The migration plan level**

The two time milestones structuring this level are the current state and the first step. These two milestones have already been explained and are present at the level above (**Figure 6**). The difference with the previous level is that here they are expressed in the form of models. This transition, from an expression in terms of performances to a representation by models, corresponds to an operationalisation process i.e., a willingness to move towards a concrete vision. This is justified at the level of the first step since this will be reached and therefore corresponds to an implemented state.

It is not the purpose of this chapter to propose one enterprise modelling approach over another. There are many business modelling methods and languages available and the choice will have to be made according to the culture of the company. It is always important to cover all the views considered important in a modelling approach: processes, data, physical system, decisions, organisation, etc. To do this, it will be possible to choose languages each corresponding to one of these views or to use multi-point of view methods that already integrate several languages (GIM or CIMOSA, for example). In any case, we consider that the approach proposed here works independently of the languages chosen.

The three main activities structuring this level are as follows.

1.*Current state modelling*. This action consists of modelling the system in its existing situation, in terms of structure and behaviour. This action concerns the current state. Then, it is possible to use the whole set of instruments available to an analyst to build the model of an existing system: consultation of documents, analysis of computer application screens, field observations, interviews, etc. This action must be able to propose, in complement to the models themselves, an analysis of the system in terms of strengths and weaknesses.

