Human work as context for development of object oriented modelling techniques

  • J. J. Kaasbøll
  • O. Smørdal
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT)


Computer systems are increasingly being used for communication and coordination of work, while object-oriented modelling techniques aim at modelling the problem domain of the computer system. Current techniques have been developed with respect to easy implementation, while we argue that further development of the modelling techniques should also be based on knowledge about human work in organisations.

We outline a learning cycle of modelling technique and point to where such knowledge should be included.

We have carried out two alternative approaches to development of object oriented techniques based on these ideas, and we outline these development processes. One approach is based on semiotic concepts, the other is based on activity theory.


Research Method Method Engineering Learning Cycle Activity Theory Semiotics Evaluation 


  1. Andersen, P.B. (1990) A Theory of Computer Semiotics: Semiotic Approaches to Construction and Assessment of Computer Systems, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bjornestad, S. (1994) A research programme for object-orientation European Journal of Information Systems 3, 1, 13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Braa, K.; Vidgen, R. (1995) Action Case: Exploring The Middle Kingdom in IS Research Methods, to be published in Proceedings of Computers in Context: Joining Forces in Design, Aarhus, Denmark.Google Scholar
  4. Carstensen, P. H.; Krogh, B.; Sorensen, C. (1995) Object oriented Modelling of Coordination Mechanisms, in Dahlbom, B.; Kämmerer, F; Ljungberg, F; Stage, J.; Sgrensen, C. (Eds.) Proceedings of IRIS 18, Gothenburg Studies in Informatics, Report 7.Google Scholar
  5. Coad, P. (1992) Object-Oriented Patterns Communications of the ACM 35, 9, 152–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Embley, D.W.; Kurtz, B.D.; Woodfield, S.C. (1992) Object-Oriented Systems Analysis: A Model-Driven Approach Prentice-Hall, NJGoogle Scholar
  7. Engeström, Y (1987) Learning by Expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  8. Essink, L.J.B.; Erhart, W.J. (1991) Object Modeling and System Dynamics in the Conceptualization Stages of Information Systems Development. In van Assche, Moulin, and Rolland (eds.) Object Oriented Approaches to Information systems North-Holland, Amsterdam, 89–116Google Scholar
  9. Fjuk, A; Sandahl, T.; Smordal, O. (1995) Toward Incorporating Computer Applications in Cooperative Work Arrangements –An activity theoretical approach, in Dahlbom, B.; Kämmerer, F; Ljungberg, F; Stage, J.; Sorensen, C. (Eds.) Proceedings of IRIS 18, Gothenburg Studies in Informatics, Report 7.Google Scholar
  10. Fog, C. (1992) A comparison of flow-and object-oriented analysis of information processing: Iterations and intuition in interpretation of large quantities of information Master thesis in Norwegian, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  11. Galliers R.D. (1992) Choosing Appropriate Information Systems Research Approaches: A Revised Taxonomy, in Galliers, R. (Ed.) Information Systems Research: issues, methods and practical guidelines. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
  12. Gottlob, G.; M. Schrefl; and B. Rock (1996) “Extending Object-Oriented Systems with Roles” ACM Transactions on Information Systems Volume 14, Number 3, July.Google Scholar
  13. Harmsen, F.; Brinkkemper, S.; Oei, H. (1994) A language and tool for the engineering of situational methods for information systems development. In Zupancic and Wrycza (eds.)Google Scholar
  14. Proceedings of The Fourth International Conference Information Systems Development —ISD’94 Methods * Tools. Theory * Practice Moderna Organizacija, Kranj, 206–214Google Scholar
  15. Henderson-Sellers, B. and Edwards, J. (1994) BOOKTWO of Object-Oriented Knowledge: The Working Object. Object-Oriented Software Engineering: Methods and Management. Prentice-Hall, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  16. Heym, M. and Osterle, H. (1993) Computer-aided methodology engineering. Information and Software Technology 35, 6 /7, 345–354Google Scholar
  17. Jacobson, I.; Christerson, M.; Johnson, P.; Övergaard, G. (1992) Object oriented Software Engeneering. A Use Case Driven Approach. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  18. Kaasboll, J. J. (1996) Between controlled irrelevance and unrepeatable complexity: Initial evaluation of the concepts of domain modelling techniques. Accepted for publication at the Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design, The 8th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Software engineering challenges in modern information systems. (CAiSE*96) (Heraklion, Greece, 20–24 May, 1996 )Google Scholar
  19. Kaasbgll, J. J. and Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (1996) Lifetime dependency relationships and their application to modelling roles and relationship objects. In A.G. Sutcliffe, F. van Assche, and D. Benyon (eds.) Domain Knowledge for Interactive System Design. Chapman * Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Kumar, K. and Welke, R. J. (1992) Methodology engineering: A proposal for situation-specific methodology construction. In Cotterman and Senn (eds.) Challenges and Strategies for Research in Systems Development. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 257–269Google Scholar
  21. Kvisli, J. (1993) Object-oriented analysis and design of adminstrative computer applications Master thesis in Norwegian, Department of Informatics, University of OsloGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin, J. and Odell, J.J. (1992) Object-Oriented Analysis and Design Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  23. Mathiassen, L.; Munk-Madsen, A.; Nielsen, P. A.; and Stage, J. (1993)Object Oriented Analysis (In Danish) Forlaget Marko, AalborgGoogle Scholar
  24. Monarchi, D. E. and Puhr, G. I. (1992) A Research Typology for Object-Oriented Analysis and Design Communications of the ACM 35, 9, 35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (1994) Analyzing the notions of attribute, aggregate, part, and member in data/knowledge modelling. In Zupancic and Wrycza (eds.) Proceedings of The Fourth International Conference Information Systems Development — ISD ‘84 Methods * Tools. Theory * Practice Moderna Organizacija, Kranj, pp. 31–42Google Scholar
  26. Nerson, J.-M. (1992) Applying Object-Oriented Analysis and Design. Communications of the ACM 35, 9, 63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pernici, B. (1990) Objects with Roles, SIGOIS Bulletin 11, 2 /3, 205–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reenskaug, T., with Wold P.; Lehne O. A. (1996) Working With Objects: the OOram Software Engineering Method. Manning, GreenwichzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Ressem, J. E. (1995) Where do all the objects come from? A study of the approach of three object-oriented methods to the identification of objects Master thesis in Norwegian, Department of Informatics, University of OsloGoogle Scholar
  30. Richardson, J. and Schwarz, P. (1991) Aspects: Extending objects to support multiple, independent roles, SIGMOD Record, 20, No. 2, 298–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rossi, M. and Brinkkemper, S. (1995) Metrics in Method Engineering. In Iivari, Lyytinen, and Rossi (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering. CAiSE ‘85, LNCS 932, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  32. Rumbaugh, J. (1995) “OMT: The object model” Journal of object-oriented programming January, 21–27Google Scholar
  33. Simone, C.; Schmidt, K. (eds.) (1993) Computational Mechanisms of Interaction for CSCW, COMIC, Esprit Basic Research Project 6225, Lancaster University, Lancaster.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, J.M. and Smith, D.C.P. (1977) Database Abstractions: Aggregation and Generalization ACM Transactions on Database Systems 2, 2, 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smgrdal, O. (1996) Soft Objects Analysis–A modelling approach for analysis of interdependent work practices. Forthcomming.Google Scholar
  36. Strauss, A. (1988) The Articulation of Project Work: An Organizational Process, in The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 29, (2), pp 163–178.Google Scholar
  37. Suchman, L. A. (1987) Plans and Situated Actions,Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. van de Weg, R. L.W. and Engmann, R. (1992) A framework and Method for Object-Oriented Information Systems Analysis and Design. In E.D. Falkenberg, C. Rolland, and E.N. ElSayed (eds.) Information System Concepts: Improving the Understanding ISCO 2, IFIP Transactions A-4, North-Holland, 123–146.Google Scholar
  39. Vessey, I. and Conger, S. A. (1994) Requirements Specification: Learning Object, Process, and Data Methodologies. Communications of the ACM 37, 5, 102–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wirfs-Brock, R.; Wilkerson, B.; Wiener, L.(1990) Designing Object-Oriented Software Prentice-Hall, NJGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. J. Kaasbøll
    • 1
  • O. Smørdal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of informaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations