Project Contexts and the Possibilities for Mixing Software Development and Systems Approaches (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 2013
This paper proposes the use of the System of Systems Methodologies (SOSM) framework by Jackson and Keys for mapping of diverse software project contexts analyzed previously in the software development literature. In addition it presents an evaluation of the suitability of Soft Systems Methodology by Checkland and the Work System Method by Alter for those specific situations within SOSM. Thus we extend the work by Bustard and Keenan and by Alter and Browne on software project contexts that may lead to better tailoring of software development processes by mixing methods within a particular project.
Two Views of Systems Engineering: Project-Centric and System Conception
Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering, Las Vegas, 28 July – 1 August, 2002
This paper discusses two different approaches to understanding the nature and purpose of Systems Engineering. The two approaches to thinking about Systems Engineering involve, on one side, a project level view in which Systems Engineering is seen as a set of processes by which major, complex projects may be addressed and completed on time and on budget and on performance. The contrasting view centres about the conceptual issues of determination of how we can be confident that our projects are appropriate and useful. This paper exposes the two views of Systems Engineering and discusses the relationship between them. The two views are different, and have different emphases, and so are instructive in different ways, but are different views of the same thing. The two views are not opposed and do not, fundamentally, conflict.
Information systems, software engineering, and systems thinking: Challenges and opportunities
2008
This article traces past research on the application of the systems approach to information systems development within the disciplines of information systems and software engineering. Their origins historically are related to a number of areas, including general systems theory. While potential improvement of software development practices is linked by some leading experts to the application of more systemic methods, the current state of the practice in software engineering and information systems development shows this is some way from being achieved. The authors propose possible directions for future research and practical work on bringing together both fields with systems thinking.
Information Systems, Software Engineering, and Systems Thinking
International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 2000
This article traces past research on the application of the systems approach to information systems development within the disciplines of information systems and software engineering. Their origins historically are related to a number of areas, including general systems theory. While potential improvement of software development practices is linked by some leading experts to the application of more systemic methods, the current state of the practice in software engineering and information systems development shows this is some way from being achieved. The authors propose possible directions for future research and practical work on bringing together both fields with systems thinking.
Information Systems Journal, 1993
Many recent studies have shown that computer-based systems continue to 'fail' at a number of different levels (Romtec, 1988; KPMG, 1990) and it is increasingly apparent (Maclaren et a/.. 1991) that the most serious failures of information technology (IT lie in the continuing inability to address those mncerns which are central to the successful achievement of individual, organizational and social goals. It is the contention of this paper that this failing is precisely because these are the areas which are ignored or inadequately treated by conventional system development methods. There is, of course, a vast body of literature concerned with the understanding of complex human activity systems. This literature oilen reflects a mass of contradictions at the epistemological and the ontological level about the behaviour of such systems and has also spawned numerous methods (and methodologies) which seek to guide the individual in making successful interventions into organizational situations (Rosenhead, 1989). Despite this multiplicity of viewpoints many writers have posited a dichotomy beiween socalled 'soft' and 'hard approaches to problem situations and use this dichotomy to inform the choice of an appropriate problem-solving methodology (Checkland, 1985). In this paper we characterize these two approaches as being concerned with either the purpose(s) of the human activity system (i.e. 'doing the right thing') or with the design of the efficient means of achieving such purpose(s) (i. e. 'doing the thing nghr). It is our belief that much of the literature and wok in either area has not concerned itself with the issues of the other. Writers on 'hard' engineering methods offen assume the question ofpurpose to be either straightforward (e.g. given in the project brief) or, paradoxically, too difficult (e.g. it is not our concern as mere systems analysts). Writers on 'soil' methods on the other hand rarely have anything to say about the design and implementation of well-engineered computer-based systems, KG Doyk JRG Wood &AT Woods.larper giving the impression that this is a somewhat mundane activity better left to technical experts. This paper, therefore, attempts to set out a rationale for the bringing together of principles from both 'hard' engineering and 'sot?' inquiry methods without doing epistemological damage to either. To illustrate our argument we concentrate on JSD (Jackson system development) as an example of system engineering (Cameron, 1983) and SSM (sot? systems methodology) as an example of system inquiry (Checkland, 1981; Checkland & Scholes, 1990). Our general thesis, however, does not depend upon either of these two approaches per se but applies to the overall issue of bringing together insights from two apparently opposed epistemological positions in an effod better to harness the power of IT in pursuit of purposeful human activity.
This article traces past research on the application of the systems approach to information systems development within the disciplines of information systems and software engineering. Their origins historically are related to a number of areas, including general systems theory. While potential improvement of software development practices is linked by some leading experts to the application of more systemic methods, the current state of the practice in software engineering and information systems development shows this is some way from being achieved. The authors propose possible directions for future research and practical work on bringing together both fields with systems thinking.
While most Systems Engineering Management (SEM) applications use some subset of traditional Project Management (PM) methods and tools, the actual practice of systems engineering management involves continuous cognitive zigzagging between systems engineering—the product domain—and project management—the project domain. Focusing on seven PM methods, we examine two research questions regarding systems engineering practitioners: (1) While conducting SEM, do they perceive a notion of a project domain, a product domain, and a combined project-product domain? (2) What is the extent to which, and ways by which, systems engineering practitioners deem PM methods as effective for supporting SEM? Using analysis of structured questionnaires among 24 participants, we verified that project and product are indeed viewed as two complementary facets of SEM, and that certain PM methods address both domains better than others with respect to particular examined factors. © 2011 Wiley international, Inc. Syst Eng