Attempting to Understand the Progress of Software Architecture Decision-Making on Large Australian Defence Projects

This short paper details exploratory research into architecture knowledge management (AKM) at the very early stages of architectural design. This is a departure from traditional AKM, instead of a focus on decisions, the focus shifts to decision making. Additional decision theories and decision-making philosophies are needed to supplement the ubiquitous normative decision theory and its associated rational decision-making, which is assumed by AKM to-date as the de facto decision theory. Extensions to the agent model paradigm have been explored to portray the evolution of a set of architecture decisions according to multiple decision theories sourced from the human sciences of neurology, psychology, and sociology. Model Of Software System Architecture Decision-making (MOSSAD) uses agent-based modeling and simulation in an attempt to understand the dynamic complexity of interdependencies & interactions found in decision-to-decision relationships amongst hundreds of decisions and their asynchronous evolutions over time. If understanding is possible, this should lead to knowledge for legitimate progress of architectural decision-making. This in turn should lead to a new theory about the time period necessary for architectural design on a project.

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

[2]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Artificial Intelligence , 1974, IFIP Congress.

[3]  George Wright,et al.  Structuring the decision process: an evaluation of methods in the structuring the decision process , 2009 .

[4]  R. O'Neill.  A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. , 1986 .

[5]  Yotaro Hatamura.  Decision-Making in Engineering Design , 2006 .

[6]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Opening up Decision Making: The View from the Black Stool , 1995 .

[7]  Nils Brunsson,et al.  The Consequences of Decision-Making , 2007 .

[8]  David J. Will.  A realist theory of science , 1981, Medical History.

[9]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[10]  J. Sterman.  Business Dynamics , 2000 .

[11]  Victor Tang,et al.  Corporate Decision Analysis: An Engineering Approach , 2006 .

[12]  Gregory Rowe,et al.  Escalation in Decision Making: The Tragedy of Taurus , 1997 .

[13]  Rik Farenhorst,et al.  Architectural Knowledge Management: Supporting Architects and Auditors , 2009 .

[14]  Leon Sterling,et al.  The Art of Agent-Oriented Modeling , 2009 .

[15]  W. Starbuck,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Decision Making , 2008 .

[16]  Gordon Lindsay Glegg,et al.  The Design Of Design , 1969 .

[17]  George A. Hazelrigg,et al.  A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design , 1998 .

[18]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  A Tool to Visualize Architectural Design Decisions , 2008, QoSA.

[19]  Jack P. C. Kleijnen,et al.  EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL , 1992 .

[20]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  An Ontology of Architectural Design Decisions in Software-Intensive Systems , 2004 .

[21]  J Swanson,et al.  Business Dynamics—Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World , 2002, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[22]  Phyllis Tharenou,et al.  Management Research Methods , 2007 .

[23]  Eberhardt Rechtin,et al.  The Art of Systems Architecting (3rd Edition) , 2013 .

[24]  P. C. Nutt,et al.  Handbook on Decision Making , 2010, Intelligent Systems Reference Library.