functions and corresponding interactions. Different business processes can be modeled in these representations through the use of "function modules" and triggers. A starting business process delivers different inputs to different functions. A process flowing through all the functions and sub-functions creates multiple outputs. Enterprise function diagrams hereby give a very easy-to-use and detailed representation of a business process and corresponding functions, inputs, outputs, and triggers. In this way, EFD has many similarities with IDEF0 diagrams, which also represent in a hierarchical way business processes as a combination of functions and triggers. The difference is that an EFD places the business functions in an organization's hierarchical perspective, which outlines the downstream of certain processes in the organization. On the contrary, IDEF0 diagrams show the responsibilities of certain business functions through the use of arrows. Also, IDEF0 has a clear representation of inputs and outputs of every (sub)function. EFD possibly could be used as a business front-end to a software modeling language like UML. The major resemblance with IDEF as a modeling tool indicates that it can be done. However, more research is needed to improve the EFD technique in such a way that formal mappings to UML can be made. about the complementary use of IDEF and UML has contributed to the acceptance of IDEF as business-front end. A similar study should be done with EFD and UML. References Software architecture Enterprise architecture