Large scale object-oriented software-development in a banking environment

An experience report
  • Dirk Bäumer
  • Rolf Knoll
  • Guido Gryczan
  • Heinz Züllighoven
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1098)


While many books have been published on object-oriented programming and design, little has been said about the overall development process. In parallel, evolutionary and participatory strategies have been discussed and used for years with variing success. We claim that combining object-oriented development with an evolutionary strategy which we call an application-oriented approach, will yield synergetic effects leading to a higher level of software quality, usability and system acceptance. This paper describes the various ingredients of our approach which are unified under a common leitmotif with matching design metaphors. A series of major industrial software projects serves as example and practical proof of the approach. We report about documents that have been produced and used within these projects and about the technical construction of the applications.


object-oriented design evolutionary system development design metaphors interactive software systems 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boehm, B. W. (1976). Software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Computers. 25(12), 1226–1241.MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Budde, R., Christ-Neumann, M.-L., & Sylla, K. H. (1992). Tools and materials, an analysis and design metaphor. Proceedings of the TOOLS 7, 135–148, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Budde, R., Kautz, K., Kuhlenkamp, K., & Züllighoven, H. (1992) Prototyping — An approach to evolutionary system development. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Budde, R., & Züllighoven, H. (1992). Software tools in a programming workshop. In C. Floyd, H. Züllighoven, R. Budde, & R. Keil-Slawik (Eds.), Software development and reality construction (pp. 252–268). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Bürkle, U., Gryczan, G., & Züllighoven, H. (1995). Object-Oriented System Development in a Banking Project: Methodology, Experience, and Conclusions. Human Computer Interaction 10 (1995) 2 & 3, pp. 293–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll, J. M., Mack, R. L., & Kellogg, W. A. (1988). Interface metaphors and user interface design. In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 1 pp. 283–307.Google Scholar
  7. Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (1990). Human computer interaction scenarios as design representation. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 555–561. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  8. Floyd, C. (1987). Outline of a paradigm change in software engineering. In G. Bjerknes, P. Ehn, & M. Kyng (Eds.), Computers and democracy — a Scandinavian challenge (pp. 191–210). Aldershot, England: Avebury.Google Scholar
  9. Floyd, C. (1992). Software development as reality construction. In C. Floyd, H. Züllighoven, R. Budde, & R. Keil-Slawik (Eds.), Software development and reality construction. (pp. 86–100). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J. (1995): Design Patterns — Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  11. Jacobson, I. (1992). Object-oriented software engineering — A use case driven approach. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  12. Lichter, H., Schneider-Hufschmidt, M., & Züllighoven, H. (1995). Prototyping in industrial software projects. Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice. IEEE Tranasactions on Software Engineering, 20(11), (pp825–832).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maaß, S., & Oberquelle, H. (1992). Perspectives and Metaphors for Human-Computer-Interaction. In C. Floyd, H. Züllighoven, R. Budde, & R. Keil-Slawik (Eds.), Software development and reality construction (pp. 233–251). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Madsen, K. H. (1988). Breakthrough by breakdown: Metaphors and structured domains. In H. K. Klein, & K. Kumar (Eds.), Information systems development for human progress in organizations. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  15. Madsen, K.-H. (1995). A Guide to Metaphorical Design. Communications of the ACM, 37(12), 57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miller, G., Galanter, E., and Pribram, K. (1960). Plans and the Structure of Behavior. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  17. Monarchi, D. E.; Puhr, G. I.: A research typology for object-oriented analysis and design. Communications of the ACM, 35 (1992) 9 S. 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Riehle, D., Züllighhoven, H (1995). A Pattern Language for Tool Construction and Integration Based on the Tools & Materials Metaphor. In: J.D. Coplien & D.C. Schmidt (EDS.), Pattern Languages of Programs. Addison-Wesley, to appear.Google Scholar
  19. Robinson, M. (1993): Design for unanticipated use. In: G. de Michelis, C. Simone, K. Schmidt (Eds.) Proc. ECSCW '93. 187–202.Google Scholar
  20. Rubin, K. S., & Goldberg, A. (1992). Object behavior analysis. Communications of the ACM, 35(9), 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rumbaugh, J., Blaha, M., Premerlani, W., Eddy, F., & Lorensen, W. (1991). Object-oriented modeling and design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Sharble, R.C. & Cohen, S.S. (1993). The Object-Oriented Brewery. Software EWngineering Notes, 18(2), 60–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Suchman, L. (1987): Plans and Situated Actions; Cambridge University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  24. Swartout, W., & Balzer, R. (1978). On the inevitable intertwining of specification and implementation. Communications of the ACM, 25(7), 438–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Bäumer
    • 1
  • Rolf Knoll
    • 1
  • Guido Gryczan
    • 2
  • Heinz Züllighoven
    • 2
  1. 1.RWG GmbHStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Arbeitsbereich SoftwaretechnikUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations