Managing Evolutionary Method Engineering by Method Rationale

This paper explores how to integrate formal meta-models with an informal method rationale to support evolutionary (continuous) method development. While the former provides an exact and computer-executable specification of a method, the latter enables concurrent learning, expansion, and refinement of method use (instances of metamodels) and meta-models (evolution of method specifications). We explain the need for method rationale by observing the criticality of evolving method knowledge in helping software organizations to learn, as well as by the recurrent failure to introduce rigid and stable methods. Like a design rationale, a method rationale establishes a systematic and organized trace of method evolution. Method rationale is located at two levels of typeinstance hierarchy depending on its type of use and the scope of the changes traced. A method construction rationale garners a history of method knowledge evolution as part of the method engineering process, which designs and adapts the method to a given

[1]  S. Thomke,et al.  Agile Product Development: Managing Development Flexibility in Uncertain Environments , 1998 .

[2]  M. Iansiti,et al.  Developing products on Internet time. , 1997, Harvard business review.

[3]  Doug Rosenberg,et al.  Use case driven object modeling with UML: a practical approach , 1999 .

[4]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Experience-based method evaluation and improvement: A process modelling approach , 1994, Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle.

[5]  Jacob L. Cybulski,et al.  A hypertext based software-engineering environment , 1992, IEEE Software.

[6]  T. F. Verhoef,et al.  Meta‐CASE: Is the game worth the candle? , 1996, Inf. Syst. J..

[7]  Mario Piattini,et al.  MANTEMA: a complete rigorous methodology for supporting maintenance based on the ISO/IEC 12207 standard , 1999, Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (Cat. No. PR00090).

[8]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Toward Reference Models of Requirements Traceability , 2001, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[9]  J. N. Brinkkemper,et al.  A language and tool for the engineering of situational methods for information systems development , 1994 .

[10]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Design rationale: Concepts, techniques, and use , 1997 .

[11]  A. Adam Whatever happened to information systems ethics? Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea , 2004 .

[12]  Janne Kaipala,et al.  Augmenting CASE Tools with Hypertext: Desired Functionality and Implementation Issues , 1997, CAiSE.

[13]  Matti Rossi,et al.  Method engineering: current research directions and implications for future research , 1996 .

[14]  Lucy Suchman Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[15]  Steven Kelly A matrix editor for a metaCASE environment , 1994, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[16]  S.M.M. Joosten,et al.  A validation procedure for information systems modeling techniques , 1996 .

[17]  KrasnerHerb,et al.  A field study of the software design process for large systems , 1988 .

[18]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Different perspectives on information systems: problems and solutions , 1987, CSUR.

[19]  Craig Hollenbach,et al.  Software process reuse in an industrial setting , 1996, Proceedings of Fourth IEEE International Conference on Software Reuse.

[20]  Cris Kobryn UML 2001: a standardization odyssey , 1999, CACM.

[21]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  PRO-ART: PROcess Based Approach to Requirements Traceability. , 1994 .

[22]  Onur Demirörs,et al.  Tailoring ISO/IEC 12207 for instructional software development , 2000, Proceedings of the 26th Euromicro Conference. EUROMICRO 2000. Informatics: Inventing the Future.

[23]  J. J. Odell,et al.  A primer to method engineering , 1996 .

[24]  Jacqueline Holdsworth Software Process Design: Out of the Tar Pit , 1994 .

[25]  Bill Curtis,et al.  A field study of the software design process for large systems , 1988, CACM.

[26]  Colette Rolland,et al.  An Approach for Method Reengineering , 2001, ER.

[27]  Mario Piattini,et al.  MANTEMA: a software maintenance methodology based on the ISO/IEC 12207 standard , 1999, Proceedings 4th IEEE International Software Engineering Standards Symposium and Forum (ISESS'99). 'Best Software Practices for the Internet Age'.

[28]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Management of Large Software Development Efforts , 1980, MIS Q..

[29]  Process model reuse support-the OPSIS approach , 1996, Proceedings 10th International Software Process Workshop.

[30]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Process Configuration with Development Tracks and Generic Project Types , 2001 .

[31]  James Bigelow,et al.  Hypertext and CASE , 1988, IEEE Software.

[32]  Michael L. Begeman,et al.  gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion , 1988, CSCW '88.

[33]  Raymond McCall,et al.  Making Argumentation Serve Design , 1996, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[34]  Jim Conallen,et al.  Modeling Web application architectures with UML , 1999, CACM.

[35]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  Henk Sol,et al.  Information Systems Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice, Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference on Comparative Review of Information Systems Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, 5-7 May, 1986 (CRIS '86) , 1986 .

[37]  Kuldeep Kumar,et al.  Methodology Engineering R : a proposal for situation-specific methodology construction , 1992 .

[38]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools , 1996, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[39]  J. N. Brinkkemper,et al.  Formalisation of information systems modelling , 1990 .

[40]  Kenneth A. Griggs,et al.  A tool for hypertext-based systems analysis and dynamic evaluation , 1994, 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[41]  Richard M. Young,et al.  Options and Criteria: Elements of design space analysis , 1991 .

[42]  Linda Rising,et al.  The Scrum Software Development Process for Small Teams , 2000, IEEE Softw..

[43]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Learning failure in information systems development , 1999, Inf. Syst. J..

[44]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Systems Without Method: The Impact of New Technologies on Information Systems Development Projects , 1992, The Impact of Computer Supported Technologies in Information Systems Development.

[45]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Method Configuration with Development Tracks and Generic Project Types , 2001 .

[46]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Configuration of Situational Process Models: an Information Systems Engineering Perspective , 1995, EWSPT.

[47]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective , 1978 .

[48]  Nick Hammond,et al.  Argumentation-based design rationale: what use at what cost? , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[49]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  Strategies for Information Requirements Determination , 1982, IBM Syst. J..

[50]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction , 1998 .

[51]  I. Nonaka A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[52]  C.F. Machado,et al.  Experience report-restructure of processes based on ISO/IEC 12207 and SW-CMM in CELEPAR , 1999, Proceedings 4th IEEE International Software Engineering Standards Symposium and Forum (ISESS'99). 'Best Software Practices for the Internet Age'.

[53]  Mark P. Ginsberg,et al.  Process Tailoring and the the Software Capability Maturity Model , 1995 .

[54]  Jan Stage,et al.  Object-oriented Analysis and Design. , 1993 .

[55]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  How Internet software companies negotiate quality , 2001, Computer.

[56]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Modelling CASE Environments in Systems Development , 1989, CASE.

[57]  Martin Fowler,et al.  Planning Extreme Programming , 2000 .

[58]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  The Disruptive Nature of Information Technology Innovations: The Case of Internet Computing in Systems Development Organizations , 2003, MIS Q..

[59]  David M. Weiss,et al.  Software Product Line Engineering , 2005, SEKE.

[60]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Situational method engineering for informational system project approaches , 1994, Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle.

[61]  Görel Hedin,et al.  Incremental Semantic Analysis , 1992 .

[62]  Kishore Sengupta,et al.  Multimedia in a design rationale decision support system , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[63]  Marcel Franckson,et al.  The Euromethod Deliverable Model and its contribution to the objectives of Euromethod , 1994, Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle.

[64]  H. Oinas-Kukkonen,et al.  Method rationale in method engineering and use , 1996 .

[65]  Teade Punter,et al.  The MEMA-model: towards a new approach for Method Engineering , 1996, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[66]  Desmond D'Souza,et al.  Objects, Components, and Frameworks with UML: The Catalysis Approach , 1998 .

[67]  Philippe Kruchten The Rational Unified Process - An Introduction, 3rd Edition , 2004, Addison Wesley object technology series.

[68]  Vasant Dhar,et al.  Supporting Systems Development by Capturing Deliberations During Requirements Engineering , 1992, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[69]  Fredrik Karlsson Bridging the Gap : between Method for Method Configuration and Situational Method Engineering , 2002 .

[70]  Alistair Cockburn,et al.  Selecting a Project 's Methodology , 2000, IEEE Softw..

[71]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Internet Software Engineering: A Different Class of Processes , 2002, Ann. Softw. Eng..

[72]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , 1981 .

[73]  Steven Kelly,et al.  Evolution and issues in metaCASE , 1996, Inf. Softw. Technol..