Assembly techniques for method engineering

  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
  • Motoshi Saeki
  • Frank Harmsen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1413)


As projects for developing information systems are getting larger and more complicated, we need to have more advanced development methods suitable for every development situation. Method engineering is the discipline to construct new methods from parts of existing methods, called method fragments. To achieve this objective, we need to clarify how to model the existing methods and how to assemble method fragments into new project-specific methods, so-called situational methods. Especially, to produce meaningful methods, we should impose some constraints or rules on method assembly processes. In this paper, we propose a framework for hierarchical method modelling (meta-modelling) from three orthogonal dimensions: perspectives, abstraction and granularity. According to each dimension, methods and/or method fragments are hierarchically modelled and classified. Furthermore, we present a method assembly mechanism and its formalization as a set of rules. These rules are presented in first order predicate logic and play an important role in the assembly process of meaningful methods from existing method fragments. The benefit of our technique is illustrated by an example of method assembly, namely the integration of the Object Model and Harel's Statechart into Objectcharts.


Object Model Method Assembly Attribute Grammar Product Fragment Method Engineer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [Ajisaka 96]
    Ajisaka, T. The Software Quark Model: A Universal Model for CASE Repositories. In Journal of Information and Software Technology, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [Brinkkemper 94]
    Brinkkemper, S., Method Engineering: Engineering of Information Systems Development Methods and Tools. In Journal of Information and Software Technology, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. [Coleman 92]
    Coleman, F., Hayes, F. and Bear, S., Introducing Objectcharts or How to Use Statecharts on Object-Oriented Design. IEEE Trans Soft. Eng., Vol.18, No.1, pp.9–18, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [De Marco 78]
    DeMarco, T., Structured Analysis and System Specification, Yourdon Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  5. [Harel 90]
    Harel, D., Lachover, H., Naamad, A., Pnueli, A., Politi, M., Sherman, R. Shutull-Trauring, A. and Trakhtenbrot, M., STATEMATE: A Working Environment for the Development of Complex Reactive Systems. IEEE Trans. Soft. Eng., Vol.16, pp.403–414, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [Harmsen 94]
    Harmsen, F., S. Brinkkemper, H. Oei, Situational Method Engineering for Information System Projects. In: Olle, T.W., and A.A. Verrijn Stuart (Eds.), Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle, Proceedings of the IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference CRIS ' 94, North-Holland, pp. 169–194, Amsterdam, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. [Harmsen 95]
    Harmsen, F. and S. Brinkkemper, Design and Implementation of a Method Base Management System for a Situational CASE Environment. In: Proceedings of the APSEC ' 95 Conference, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. [Harmsen 96]
    Harmsen, F., and M. Saeki, Comparison of Four Method Engineering Languages. In: In: S. Brinkkemper, K. Lyytinen and R. Welke (Eds.), Method Engineering: Principles of Method Construction and Tool Support, Chapman & Hall, pp.209–231, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [Harmsen 97]
    Harmsen, F., Situational Method Engineering. Moret Ernst & Young, 1997Google Scholar
  10. [Hoef 95]
    Hoef, R. van de, and F. Harmsen, Quality Requirements for Situational Methods. In: Grosz, G. (Ed.), In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on the Next Generation of CASE Tools, JyvÄskylÄ, Finland, June 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [Katayama 89]
    Katayama, T., A Hierarchical and Functional Software Process Description and Its Enaction. In: Proceedings of 11th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering. pp.-343–352, May 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [Klooster 97]
    Klooster, M., S. Brinkkemper, F. Harmsen, and G. Wijers, Intranet Facilitated Knowledge Management: A Theory and Tool for Defining Situational Methods. In: A. Olive, J.A. Pastor (Eds.), Proceedings of CAiSE'97. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1250, Springer Verlag, pp.303–317, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. [Nuseibeh 95]
    Nuseibeh, B., J Kramer and A. Finkelstein, Expressing the Relationship between Multiple View in Requirements Specification. In: Proceedings of 15th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, Baltimore, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 187–197, 1993.Google Scholar
  14. [Olle 91]
    Olle, T.W., J. Hagelstein, I.G. MacDonald, C. Rolland, H.G. Sol, F.J.M. van Asssche, A.A. Verrijn-Stuart, Information Systems Methodologies — A Framework for Understanding, 2nd Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. [Rumbaugh 91]
    Rumbaugh, J., Object oriented modeling and design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. [Saeki 94]
    Saeki, M., and K. Wen-yin, Specifying Software Specification and Design Methods. In: G. Wijers, S. Brinkkemper, T. Wasserman (Eds.), Proceedings of CAiSE'94, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 811, Springer Verlag, pp. 353–366, Berlin, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. [Slooten 96]
    Slooten, K. van and B. Hodes, Characterizing IS Development Projects. In: S. Brinkkemper, K. Lyytinen and R. Welke (Eds.), Method Engineering: Principles of Method Construction and Tool Support, Chapman & Hall, pp.29–44, 1996Google Scholar
  18. [Song 95]
    Song, X., A Framework for Understanding the Integration of Design Methodologies. In: ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 46–54, 1995.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [Sorenseon 88]
    Sorenson, P.G., J.P. Tremblay, A.J. McAllister, The Metaview System for Many Specifications Environements. In IEEE Software, Vol.30, No.3, pp.30–38, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [Ward 85]
    Ward,P., S. Mellor, Structured Development for Real-time Systems, Yourdon Press, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
    • 1
  • Motoshi Saeki
    • 2
  • Frank Harmsen
    • 3
  1. 1.Baan Company R & DAC BarneveldThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Tokyo Institute of TechnologyTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Moret Ernst & YoungGC UtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations