Advertisement

Highlighting Value and Effort Drivers Early in Business and System Models

  • Matthias Book
  • Simon Grapenthin
  • Volker Gruhn
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 513)

Abstract

In complex business modelling and software development projects, we often observe that teams focus on those aspects of a system that are well understood or easy to resolve, while a blind eye is turned (consciously or subconsciously) to the actual value and effort drivers – i.e. those components that require higher effort due to their intrinsic value, risk, complexity or uncertainty. In this paper, we introduce a pragmatic approach for highlighting elements of high-level business and system models with visual annotations that mark particular issues, requirements or complexities that would otherwise not immediately meet the eye, and would thus present risks to a project’s successful completion if uncovered too late.

Keywords

Models Annotations Value-driven software engineering 

References

  1. 1.
    Book, M., Grapenthin, S., Gruhn, V.: Highlighting value and effort drivers early in business and system models. In: Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. New Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques, vol. 265, pp. 530–544, IOS Press (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Book, M., Grapenthin, S., Gruhn, V.: Seeing the forest and the trees: focusing team interaction on value and effort drivers. In: Proceedings of 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, (ACM SIGSOFT 2012/FSE-20), pp. 11–16. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boehm, B.W., Sullivan, K.J.: Software economics: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Future of Software Engineering (FOSE 2000), pp. 319–343. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grapenthin, S., Book, M., Gruhn, V., Schneider C., Völker, K.: Reducing complexity using an interaction room – an experience report. In: Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on the Design of Communication Conference (SIGDOC 2013), pp. 71–76. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davidson, E.J.: Joint application design (JAD) in practice. J. Syst. Softw. 45(3), 215–223 (1999). ElsevierCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burge, J.E., Carroll, J.M., McCall, R., Mistrík, I.: Rationale-Based Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile Software Development with Scrum. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petre, M., Sharp, H., Freudenberg, S.: The mystery of the writing that isn’t on the wall: differences in public representations in traditional and agile software development. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE 2012), pp. 120–122. IEEE Computer Society (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goldschmidt, G.: The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Res. J. 4, 123–143 (1991). Taylor & FrancisCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rodriguez, A., Fernandez-Medina, E., Piattini, M.: Security requirement with a UML 2.0 profile. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2006), pp. 670–677. IEEE Computer Society (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rodriguez, A., Fernandez-Medina, E., Piattini, M.: A BPMN extension for the modeling of security requirements in business processes. Trans. Inf. Syst. E90-D(4), 745–752 (2007). Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saeedi, K., Zhao, L., Falcone Sampaio, P.R.: Extending BPMN for supporting customer-facing service quality requirements. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2010), pp. 616–623. IEEE Computer Society (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zou, J., Pavlovski, C.: Control case approach to record and model non-functional requirements. Inf. Syst. E-Bus. Manage. 6(1), 49–67 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Book, M., Grapenthin, S., Gruhn, V.: Value-based migration of legacy data structures. In: Winkler, D., Biffl, S., Bergsmann, J. (eds.) SWQD 2014. LNBIP, vol. 166, pp. 115–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of IcelandReykjavíkIceland
  2. 2.paluno – The Ruhr Institute for Software TechnologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations