Constructing End-User Design Environments

Implementing Client-Led Development
  • Richard B. Beeby
  • John G. Gammack
  • Malcolm K. Crowe

Abstract

The conventional wisdom in the development of software systems is that such systems should be built against a set of requirements that have been captured during the requirements analysis phase of the development life cycle. Textbooks on software engineering describe methods for system design and implementation that are predicated upon the idea that one should not begin to construct a system until one has a detailed (many would say, complete) understanding of what the external behaviour of the system is to be. The investment of considerable effort in the requirements phase, so as to ensure that the requirements have been fully elicited, provides not only the foundation for building the system but also serves as the basis for the contract between system developer and client.

Keywords

Development Life Cycle Punctuate Equilibrium Strategic Information System Software Engineer Note Phyletic Gradualism 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Avison, D. E. and Wood-Harper, A. T. 1990 Multiview: An Exploration in Information Systems Development, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Crowe, M., Beeby, R. and Gammack, J. 1996 Constructing Systems and Information: A Process View, McGraw-Hill, London.Google Scholar
  3. Davies, A. M. 1992 Operational prototyping: a new development approach, IEEE Software 9(5), 70–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DuBellis, M. and Haapala, C. 1995 User-centric software engineering, IEEE Expert February, 34-41.Google Scholar
  5. Eldredge, N. and Gould, S. J. 1972 Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism, in: Models in Paleobiology, (T. J. M. Schopf, editor), Freeman, San Francisco, pages 82–115.Google Scholar
  6. Floyd, C. 1987 Outline of a paradigm change in software engineering, in: Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge, (G. Bjerknes, P. Ehn, and M. Kyng, editors), Avebury, Aldershot; reprinted in: Software Engineering Notes 13(2), 25–38, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. Gammack, J. G. and Beeby, R. 1995 Organisational adaptability: future design structures in distributed environments, in: Proceedings, SISnet Strategic Information Systems, Bern University, Bern, pages 1–14.Google Scholar
  8. Giddens, A. 1984 The Constitution of Society, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  9. Goguen, J. 1996 Formality and informality in requirements engineering, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Requirements Engineering, IEEE Press CS Press, Los Alamos.Google Scholar
  10. Gould, S. J. and Eldredge, N. 1977 Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered, Paleobi-ology 3, 115–151.Google Scholar
  11. Harre, R. and Gillett, G. 1994 The Discursive Mind, Sage, London.Google Scholar
  12. Kampis, G. 1991 Self-Modifying Systems in Biology and Cognitive Science: A New Framework for Dynamics, Information and Complexity, IFSR International Series on Science and Engineering volume 6, Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Kuhn, T. 1962 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  14. Kyng, M. 1991 Designing for cooperation: cooperating in design, Communications of the ACM 34(12), 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehman, M. M. 1980 Programs, life cycles and program evolution, Proceedings of the IEEE 68, 1060–1076; reprinted in: Program Evolution: Processes of Software Change (M. M. Lehman and L. A. Belady, editors), Academic Press, London, 1983, pages 393-449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mumford, E. 1983 Designing Human Systems for New Technology: The ETHICS Method, Manchester Business School Press, Manchester.Google Scholar
  17. Reed, M. 1992 Introduction, in: Rethinking Organisation: New Directions in Organisation Theory and Analysis, (M. Reed and M. Hughes, editors), Sage, London, pages 1–16.Google Scholar
  18. Riedl, R. 1977 Order in Living Organisms, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Sawyer, K. 1993 OPIUM Handbook, Topic, Bristol.Google Scholar
  20. Schuler, D. and Namioka, A. (editors) 1992 Participatory Design: Principles and Practices, Laurence Erlbaum, Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  21. Shorter, J. 1993 Conversational Realities: Constructing Life through Language, Sage, London.Google Scholar
  22. Stanley, S. M. 1979 Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  23. Stowell, F. A. and West, D. 1994 Client-Led Design: A Systemic Approach to Information Systems Provision, McGraw-Hill, London.Google Scholar
  24. Winograd, T. and Flores, F. 1986 Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design, Abtex, Norwood.Google Scholar
  25. Winograd, T. 1995 From programming environments to environments for design, Communications of the ACM 38(6), 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wood, J. and Silver, D. 1989 Joint Application Design, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard B. Beeby
    • 1
  • John G. Gammack
    • 1
  • Malcolm K. Crowe
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing and Information SystemsUniversity of PaisleyScotland

Personalised recommendations