Difference between revisions of "Omega WIP page"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
A summary of the material and discussions on that forum appears in the table below, for easy reference. If there are significant points missing, please edit this page and its table content to correct. | A summary of the material and discussions on that forum appears in the table below, for easy reference. If there are significant points missing, please edit this page and its table content to correct. | ||
| − | + | {| class="wikitable" | |
| + | | Date created | ||
| + | | Topic title | ||
| + | | Content summary | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | 5/5/2015 | ||
| + | | Summary of Omega Men Session at WG Meeting 23/04/15 | ||
| + | | Notes of meeting. Diagram of aim or post guide awareness: pre-Guide vs post-Guide awareness, both axes competency levels. | ||
| + | Thoughts about guide contents: case studies, languages, applicability of MBSE to specific project. | ||
| + | Reference to alignment with ISO 15288. | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | 16/7/2015 | ||
| + | | Moving Forward | ||
| + | | Discussions: refinement to above framework, UKSPEC (yes, no), that MBSE is ‘not new’, stakeholders (inc system engineer, engineering manager) and use case diagram. | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | 21/10/2015 | ||
| + | | 2015 10 20 Omega Group mtg Bham | ||
| + | | Notes of meeting. Emergence of the Why / when / where / who / how structure, MBSE vs 15288 outcomes, other stakeholders?, reference to PM and RACI framework, benefits and challenges. | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | 7/11/2015 | ||
| + | | MBSE Question | ||
| + | | Summary of the 6 questions from Engineer / Eng Manager perspectives, suggestion common questions vs any stakeholder, pointer to OmegaProgress slideset at ASEC (inc slide 9 “how you can contribute”: 3 questions to MBSE WG participants), details of one response to presentation (8 paras), response from JJ “good points, apparently confusion over stakeholders?”, incorporate MBSE during bid phase. | ||
| + | |} | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
The current active thinking of the Omega structure is that it is based on 6 key questions, and from the perspectives of at least two stakeholders with respect to MBSE: | The current active thinking of the Omega structure is that it is based on 6 key questions, and from the perspectives of at least two stakeholders with respect to MBSE: | ||
Revision as of 15:59, 3 December 2015
Omega Team Reference material (source)
The majority of the material is actually on Alex's mbse.org site, specifically at this link, for those registered for the site:
A summary of the material and discussions on that forum appears in the table below, for easy reference. If there are significant points missing, please edit this page and its table content to correct.
| Date created | Topic title | Content summary |
| 5/5/2015 | Summary of Omega Men Session at WG Meeting 23/04/15 | Notes of meeting. Diagram of aim or post guide awareness: pre-Guide vs post-Guide awareness, both axes competency levels.
Thoughts about guide contents: case studies, languages, applicability of MBSE to specific project. Reference to alignment with ISO 15288. |
| 16/7/2015 | Moving Forward | Discussions: refinement to above framework, UKSPEC (yes, no), that MBSE is ‘not new’, stakeholders (inc system engineer, engineering manager) and use case diagram. |
| 21/10/2015 | 2015 10 20 Omega Group mtg Bham | Notes of meeting. Emergence of the Why / when / where / who / how structure, MBSE vs 15288 outcomes, other stakeholders?, reference to PM and RACI framework, benefits and challenges. |
| 7/11/2015 | MBSE Question | Summary of the 6 questions from Engineer / Eng Manager perspectives, suggestion common questions vs any stakeholder, pointer to OmegaProgress slideset at ASEC (inc slide 9 “how you can contribute”: 3 questions to MBSE WG participants), details of one response to presentation (8 paras), response from JJ “good points, apparently confusion over stakeholders?”, incorporate MBSE during bid phase. |
Overview
The current active thinking of the Omega structure is that it is based on 6 key questions, and from the perspectives of at least two stakeholders with respect to MBSE:
- An individual systems engineer;
- An engineering manager (with responsibility for a project, or organisational unit / department / function).
Current generic questions are proposed to be (JJ - have deliberately re-ordered to bring Why to top):
- Why should I adopt MBSE?
- What does MBSE mean for my role?
- Where (activity area, disciplines level of decomp) do I employ MBSE?
- When (temporal e.g. life cycle phase, criteria) should MBSE be employed?
- Who else needs to participate in MBSE activities?
- How do I make use of MBSE on my project?
So what we see below are two subsections, for each of these two primary roles, and with an elaborated response for each of the 6 questions, for each role.
Details
Individual Systems Engineer
Why should I adopt MBSE?
(elaborated response)
What does MBSE mean for my role?
(elaborated response)
Where (activity area, disciplines level of decomp) do I employ MBSE?
(elaborated response)
When (temporal e.g. life cycle phase, criteria), should MBSE be employed?
(elaborated response)
Who else need to participate in MBSE activities?
(elaborated response)
How do I make use of MBSE on my project?
(elaborated response)
An engineering manager
Why should I adopt MBSE?
(elaborated response)
What does MBSE mean for my role?
As an engineering manager the focus is on the appropriate engineering contribution to effective development to cost, quality and timescale. This then brings in all the perspectives of persons, process, tools, infrastructure, interoperability, configuration control, technical risk, lean vs agility, and appropriateness of approach for the given level of integrity (safety level etc).
Conventional document-based systems engineering (DBSE) is a known quantity (to some extent). Adopting a MBSE approach requires a different skill set and experience, different tools, different infrastructure and a profile of progress for the development that is likely to be significantly different to that for DBSE.
Where (activity area, disciplines level of decomp) do I employ MBSE?
(elaborated response)
When (temporal e.g. life cycle phase, criteria), should MBSE be employed?
(elaborated response)
Who else need to participate in MBSE activities?
(elaborated response)
How do I make use of MBSE on my project?
(elaborated response)
