Advertisement

Connecting method engineering knowledge: a community based approach

  • Isabelle Mirbel
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 244)

Abstract

Current practices in the field of information system development reveal a crucial need for spreading and sharing methodological knowledge in addition to existing proposals about formalizing, building and tailoring methods. Currently, the methodological knowledge is mostly shared and spreaded inside an organization by organizing training sessions, attending to conferences and reading manuals. Moreover, it is not very interactive and do not provide efficient support for evolution. The methodological knowledge under consideration ranges from very formal descriptions to informal experience report, empirical know-how and best practices. But in reality, feedbacks about methods in practice are most of the time neither captured nor integrated to the corporate knowledge. And finally, method bases which have been developed to store predefined method fragments to support method tailoring inside organizations have not been very successful in the industrial context. For all these reasons we propose an approach to share and spread methodological knowledge based on the concept of community of practice. Our proposal aims at supporting exchange of knowledge outside of the boundaries of the organization and deepens members knowledge and expertise about methodological knowledge by interacting on an ongoing basis. In this paper, we focus on the lightweight top ontology we propose to specify the core concepts required to qualify any piece of knowledge about method.

Keywords

Requirement Engineer Method Component Community Base Approach Information System Development Method Fragment 
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.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    A. de Moor and H. Delugach (2006) Software Process Validation: Comparing Process and Practice Models. 18th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering-CAISE 2006 Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design-EMMSAD.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Lings and B. Lundell (2004). Method-in-Action and Method-in-Tool: Some Implications for CASE. 6th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems-ICEIS 2004, Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. Rolland (2005). L’ingénierie des méthodes: une visite guidée. e-TI-la revue électronique des technologies d’information, http://www.revue-eti.netdocument.php?id=726, (1).
  6. 6.
    C. Rolland and C. Salinesi (2001). Ingénierie des systemes d’information. Hermes.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Järvi and H. Hakonen and T. Mäkilva, (2007). Developer driven approach to situational method engineering. IFIP WG8.1 working conference on situational method engineering: fundamentals and experiences (ME07), Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Hustad (2007). A conceptual framework for knowledge integration in distributed networks of practice. 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. Wenger (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. and New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Wenger, N. White, J. Smith, K. Rowe (2005). Technology for communities. CEFRIO.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Hustad (2007). A conceptual framework for knowledge integration in distributed networks of practice. 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Wenger (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. and New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. Wenger, N. White, J. Smith, K. Rowe (2005). Technology for communities. CEFRIO.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Karlsson and K. Wistrand (2006). Combining method engineering with activity theory: theoretical grounding of the method component concept. European Journal of Information Systems, (15), 2006, pp. 82–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Vidou, R. Dieng-Kuntz, A. El Ghali, C. Evangelou, A. Giboin, A. Tifous and S. Jacquemart (2006). Towards an Ontology for Knowledge Management in Communities of Practice.. 6th International Conference on Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management-PAKM 2006, Vienna, Austria, 2006, pp. 303–314.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    I. Mirbel (2004). A polymorphic context frame to support scalability and evolvability of information system development processes. 6th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems-ICEIS 2004, Porto, Portugal, April, 2004, pp. 131–138.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    I. Mirbel and J. Ralyté (2006). Situational method engineering: combining assembly-based and roadmap-driven approaches. Requirement Engineering Journal, 11(1), 2006, pp. 58–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    I. Mirbel and V. De Rivieres (2003). Conciliating User Interface and Business Domain Analysis and Design. 9th International Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems-OOIS 2003, Geneva, Switzerland, September, 2003, pp. 383–399.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    I. Mirbel and V. de Rivieres (2002). Adapting Analysis and Design to Software Context: The JECKO Approach.. 8th International Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems-OOIS 2002, Montpellier, France, Sept., 2002, pp. 223–228.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    I. Mirbel and V. de Rivières (2003). UML and the unified process. IRMA Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. Ralyteé and R. Deneckere and C. Rolland (2003). Towards a Generic Model for Situational Method Engineering.. 15th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE 2003), 2003, pp. 95–110.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Ralyté (2001). Ingénierie des méthodes à base de composants. Université Paris I-Sorbonne, January, 2001.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. Ralyté and P. Backlund and H. Kühn and M. A. Jeusfeld (2006). Method Chunks for Interoperability. 25th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, ER 2006, 2006, pp. 339–353.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    J.P. Tolvanen (1998). Incremental Method Engineering with Modeling. Tools: Theoretical Principles and Empirical Evidence. University of Jyvskyl, Finland, 1998.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    K. van Slooten, B. Hobbes (1998). Characterizing IS development projects. IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on Method Engineering: Principle s of method construction and tool support, Great Britain, 1996, pp. 29–44.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    L.H. Jean-Baptiste, C. Salinesi and G. Fanmuy (2005). Sharing Methodological Knowledge with REGAL: “Requirements Engineering Guide for All”. 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Paris, France, 2005, pp. 461–462.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Bajec, D. Vavpotic and M. Kirsper (2004). The scenario and tool-support for constructing flexible, people-focused system developement methodologies. 13th International Conference on Information Systems Development-ISD 2004, Vilnius, Lituania, September.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Leppanen (2005). Conceptual Analysis of Current ME Artifacts in Terms of Coverage: A Contextual Approach. 1st International Workshop on Situational Engineering Processes Methods, Techniques and Tools to Support Situation-Specific Requirements Engineering Processes (SREP), in conjunction with 13th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 75–90.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. Leppanen (2006). Towards an Ontology for Information Systems Development. 18th Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering-CAISE 2006 Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design-EMMSAD.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    M. Rossi and B. Ramesh and K. Lyytinen and J.P. Tolvanen (2004). Managing evolutionary method engineering by method rationale. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(9), pp. 356–391.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    M.P. Zarb (2006). Modelling participation in Virtual Communities of Practice. London, UK.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    S. Brinkkemper (1996). Method Engineering: Engineering of Information Systems Development Methods and Tools. Information and Software Technology, 38(4), 1996, pp. 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    S. Brinkkemper and M. Saeki and F. Harmsen (1998). Assembly techniques for method engineering. 10th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Pisa, Italy, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabelle Mirbel
    • 1
  1. 1.I3S LaboratoryUMR 6070 UNSA-CNRSSophia Antipolis CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations