Phd candidate : Timo laudan, eads innovation Works President : Prof. Manfred broy, Technical University of Munich



Yüklə 445 b.
tarix25.07.2018
ölçüsü445 b.
#58087


  • PhD Candidate : Timo LAUDAN, EADS Innovation Works

  • President : Prof. Manfred BROY, Technical University of Munich

  • Reviewers : Prof. Benoit EYNARD, Université de Technologie Compiègne Prof. Pascal Le MASSON, Ecole des Mines de Paris

  • Industrial Supervisors : Philippe HOMSI, Airbus SAS (Unfortunately not here today)

  • Dr. Michel DUREIGNE, EADS Innovation Works

    • Axel MAURITZ, EADS Innovation Works
  • Scientific Supervisors : Prof. Michel TOLLENAERE, University of Grenoble, G-SCOP

  • Prof. Mickaël GARDONI, University of Strasbourg (INSA), LGeCo


Presentation Outline



Presentation Outline

  • Research Organisation

  • Research Scope

  • Research Opportunity

  • Research Question

  • Research Methodology

  • Theory - Reviewed Concepts



Research Organisation



Research Scope

  • Collaboration between Business and Product Development (PD) Teams establishing the top-level product definition (requirement analysis)…

  • in context Project-and engineering-based Organisation



Research Opportunity (1/2)

  • Context

  • Traditional requirements analysis models focused on system- and user interactions

  • Much efforts – in particular industrial - on logical breakdown, management, dissemination and proof on the level of implementation of requirements without being strongly connected to the organisation and its business intents

  • Related Work

  • Focus on “front-end negotiations”: early requirements analysis activities concerned with reconciling business problems, opportunities and product (high-level) requirements

  • Intentional modelling: semi-formal and formal approaches using the concept of goals to develop coherent requirement models that aims at increasing rationalisation and confidence in engineering definitions



Research Opportunity (2/2)

  • Challenges - Literature shows that…

  • Coordination and communication gap in project-and engineering based organisations, especially between stakeholders and developers (Karlson et al. 2007)

  • Lack of means that enables to perform stakeholder cooperation within the product development process (Kavakli/Loucopoulos 2003)

  • Problem of supporting cross-community in knowledge creation and sharing is relatively under-investigated (Novak/Wurst 2004)

  • Formalisms in early requirements analysis fall short in establishing “usable” intentional structures to be used non-experts (Lamsweerde 2004)



Research Question Problematic

  • Research Question

  • How to organise collaboration and knowledge conversion between business management and PD Teams concerned with the elaboration of top-level product requirements?

  • In context of the research question…

    • How to find coherence (adequacy, completeness and consistency) within the evolution of the project’s product on the level of business and engineering?
    • How to maintain and trace knowledge evolutions in context of the project’s product between business and engineering?


Research Methodology



Theory (1/3) Reviewed Concepts to Study Collaboration and Knowledge Conversion in Cross-Communities – Key Features

  • Collaboration To understand principles of social interaction

    • Two individuals or larger collectives of individuals (communities) [OED 2003, Bahrdt 2000]
    • Modes of communication, cooperation and coordination towards the established objective for collaboration (group awareness, emergence) [cf. Elsen 2007]
  • Knowledge To understand the object of collaboration

    • Knowledge should be exchanged within the objective of collaboration [Elsen 2007] (different natures of knowledge, different knowledge conversion modes)
  • Context To understand how other people can understand and learn from knowledge in its initial meaning

    • Essential for knowledge conversion of organisation and its actors for taking appropriate and valuable actions [Klemke 1999; Kivijärvi 2004]
  • Ontology To understand how to coordinate and organise knowledge conversion

    • Offering a skeletal and relational organisation for knowledge bases associated to represent different viewpoints based on the organisational level and area [Huettenegger 2006; Swartout et al 1996]


Theory (2/3) Reviewed Concepts to Study Collaboration and Knowledge Conversion in Cross-Communities – Key Features

  • Organisation To understand the frame in which collaboration appears

    • Organisations are “immense” interpretation systems [cf. Daft/Weick 1984; Baumard 1999]
    • Organisation and the smaller unit community provide the frame in which collaboration could occur
  • Challenges reaching knowledge conversion in cross-communities (Novak/Wurst 2004):

    • Different “thought worlds”
    • Different knowledge perspectives
    • Establish a shared Context of Knowing
    • Perspective Making and Perspective Taking
    • Boundary Objects (Interpretable Knowledge artefacts)
    • Visualisation of cross-community knowledge perspectives


Theory (3/3) Conclusion on Reviewed Concepts



Presentation Outline

  • Empirical Context

  • Conduction of Empirical Study

  • Results of the Empirical Study



Empirical Context



Conduction of the Study (1/2) Collect Data



Conduction of the Study (2/2) Structure & Interpret Data



Results of the Study (1/3)



Results (2/3) Industrial Problematic in Context of the Research Question

  • P.1 Business intents are stored in different information formats and spaces

  • P2. Flat and non-contextualized representation (macro-viewing on documents) of business intents

  • P3. PD teams often loose the justifying connection to business intents throughout the PD process

  • P4. PD teams are often unsure if they implemented business intents completely and consistent in forms of requirements

  • P5. Difficult to prove and trust the correct implementation of business intents in engineering processes and information spaces



Results (3/3) Industrial Need in Context of the Research Question



Presentation Outline



Conceptual Solution Model (1/8) Confluence of Reviewed Concepts



Conceptual Solution Model (2/8) Structure, organise, specify and deploy business intents on principles provided by Knowledge-CoCoOn



Conceptual Solution Model (3/8) The Role of Collaboration in the BNE-P Model



Conceptual Solution Model (4/8) The Role of Collaboration in the BNE-P Model



Conceptual Solution Model (5/8) The Role of Ontology in the BNE-P Model



Conceptual Solution Model (6/8) The Role of Ontology in the BNE-P Model



Conceptual Solution Model (7/8) The Role of Context in the BNE-P Model



Conceptual Solution Model (8/8) The Role of Context in the BNE-P Model



Presentation Outline

  • Overview experiments

  • Experiment 1- Test the implementation of BNE-P Model Classes and Attributes

  • Experiment 2- Test valuation and traceability made possible by the BNE-P Model

  • Induced Developments



Three Different Experiments



Experiment 1 (1/5) VIVACE: Context

  • In the second half of VIVACE (first year of the thesis) a project task was launched which allowed us to apply the developed BNE-P model

  • At that stage (partially) business intents and engineering definitions were established, but in an individual mode (different structures, spread over different types of documents, …)



Experiment 1 (2/5) VIVACE: BNE-P Model Definition



Experiment 1 (3/5) VIVACE: BNE-P Model Implementation



Experiment 1 (4/5) VIVACE: Methodological Review



Experiment 1 (5/5) VIVACE: Feedbacks against empirical findings



Experiment 2 (1/8) VIVACE: Context



Experiment 2 (2/8) VIVACE: 1/ Evaluation of Soft-Goal Tree



Experiment 2 (3/8) VIVACE: 1/ Evaluation of Soft-Goal Tree



Experiment 2 (4/8) VIVACE: 1/ Evaluation of Soft-Goal Tree



Experiment 2 (5/8) VIVACE: 2/ Tracing Mechanisms



Experiment 2 (6/8) VIVACE: 2/ Tracing Mechanisms



Experiment 2 (7/8) VIVACE: Review



Experiment 2 (8/8) VIVACE: Review



Induced Developments Updated Prototypical Environment



Presentation Outline

  • Contributions and Criticisms

  • Complementary Research Issues

  • Concluding Remark



Contribution and Criticisms (1/3)

  • Result 1: BNE-P Model

  • Contribution to Theory

  • A knowledge-driven proposal to intentional modelling structuring, organising and deploying business intents informally

    • Identification of goal-trees and resulting specified requirements to serve collaboration scenes at the interface of business and engineering
    • Enables a first proof of coherency before entering into heavier formalisms
    • Can provide attributes that relate to project management information and keep the link to business & engineering information spaces (documents)
  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)

  • Clear lack of integration with stronger formalisms in intentional modelling.

  •  Integrate strategies to perform transversal proof of coherency amongst a number of goal-trees organised in various BNE-Ps

  • Proof of different interdependency types amongst BNE-P organised goal-structures, e.g. semantic, cost/value, time



Contribution and Criticisms (2/3)

  • Result 1: BNE-P Model (Experiment 1+3)

  • Contribution to Practice

  • VIVACE: Increased visibility / transparency on the VIVACE project (from the inside & outside) in the closure phase of the project

  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)

  • VIVACE: Clear lack of experimentations in set-up and execution phase of project

  •  Investigate the BNE-P Model along the PD process and include phase-specific surveys: interview cycles, questionnaires, etc.

  •  To investigate business and engineering domain members’ behaviours during collaborations and knowledge conversions



Contribution and Criticisms (3/3)

  • Result 2: BNE-P Evaluative Model including Traceability

  • Contribution to Theory/Practice (Experiment 2)

  • Orientation on value adding activities: improved indication of expected functional qualities and orientation on prioritised business communities’ intentional structures

  • Reflexive Traceability: The BNE-P evaluative model provides channels for cross-domain associativity (introduced as boundary objects) offering a logic to follow in bottom-up or top-down fashions throughout intentional (BNE-P) and engineering information structures

  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)

  • Clear lack of proof under operational conditions

  • Open issues:

  • Integration with stakeholder analysis approaches

  • Integration with higher level metrics (on enterprise level)

  • Scalability (balancing appropriate method and tool assembly in context of the collaboration challenge)



Complementary Research Issues

  • BNE-P Model

    • Investigate BNE-P in ideation phase that allows researches (and R&T strategy) to prepare argumentation baseline towards new innovations.
    • Investigate BNE-P on a different scale, e.g. SME:
    • In particular, what are relevances of BNE-P if we face a non collaborative situation? That means business intent and formalisation in forms of specified requirements is done by the same person.
  • Empirical Study Results

    • Validate surveyed results in context of other projects (same or different context)
    • Use surveyed material for quantitative research (e.g. compiling questionnaire with closed questions) and proof hypothesis and establish generalised statements


Concluding Remark

  • The presented work advocates the point that if current intentional models fall short in establishing usable intentional structures that are able to provide the transparency for supporting continuously business-engineering evolutions within collaboration and knowledge conversions along a PD process, then it could be valuable to have a mediating instance that organises collaboration and knowledge conversions.

    • It can act (promote) in front of stronger formalisms in terms of coherency development in requirements.
    • It could strengthen negotiation forces and group-awareness among business and engineering community.
    • It provides organisation of knowledge bases, i.e. community-related information spaces and anchors a value-oriented definition of business intent.
    • It supports not only front-end negotiations, but also establishes continuous interactivity structures and strengthens product development performance in terms of increasing reactivity and group-awareness between business-engineering.


  • Many Thanks!



Yüklə 445 b.

Dostları ilə paylaş:




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin