Difference between revisions of "SSE Meeting 20"

Latest revision as of 13:03, 9 June 2016

INCOSE UK Service Systems Engineering Working Group

Meeting: 6 June 2016, Rolls Royce, Filton, Bristol

[edit] Attendees:

• Iain Cardow (RR), Alan Crawford (Babcock), Andrew Farncombe (INCOSE), John Davies (Leeds), Tim James (NHS), Edwin Swidenbank (Harmonic)

[edit] Actions from last meeting

• Steve Ashlin to contact James Hillman No contact made. Decided to drop this action and talk to James at other meetings.
• All to review IBM Service Science community website. Seen as way of pushing IBM products rather than contributing to our work.
• All to look at case studies with regard to things we have come up with. Two case studies looked at - for ASEC2016 paper.
• All to review NAF 4.0 draft for Service Views. Looked at - NAF is going very much Service based, but no work being done on it.

[edit] Status of IS2016 paper

• Paper submitted and accepted as paper 54.
• All release forms completed.
• John applied to attend by the deadline so the paper will go into the programme.
• Slides now moved onto IS2016 Powerpoint template.

[edit] ASEC2016

[edit] Paper

• Aim of paper is to apply ideas/approaches from the ASEC2015/IS2016 papers to two Case Studies
• Abstract submitted and approved.
• Now need to provide 6 page paper by 10 June. More likely to be 12 pages.

[edit] Workshop

Agreed to ask ofor a 45min workshop at the conference. We hope this is after the paper presentation and we can discuss what is needed to go forward.

[edit] Poster

All Working Groups asked to submit poster - can be done using the slides in the Presentation.

[edit] Way forward

• John to draft paper and send out late on Tuesday 7 June (a lot of it is using existing words).
• Phone in 14-00 on 8 June to go through comments, Iain to set up.
• John to update and send into INCOSE on 10 June.

[edit] Discussions

'Rough' slides of the two Case Studies for ASEC2016 were used as focus for discussions. The following points were raised:

• Major issue with lack of Stakeholder Analysis and Requirements Definition
• Use of Standard Systems Engineering processes would have sorted this - but needs to be applied t=in a wider area than for Systems
• Business case was OK, but it was static needs to be used to manage the Service
• Not clear who owned the risk - who lost money when the service failed to make money. This was the Rental Companies but the didn't realise or have power to change things.
• Services have a wider scope in that Stakeholder actions and interactions need to be understood.
• ITIL provides a set of management activities that need to be considered/addressed such as Help Desk, reporting,
• Business models need to be maintained through the Service Life.
• for large Services - built from other Services, it is not clear where blame lies if a low level service fails causing the higher level service to fail. eg if you buy a book from Amazon and it doesn't arrive by the expected time - is the responsibility with Amazon, the original supplier, or the transport. The can be covered by SLAs.

[edit] Next Meeting

• Monday 19 September 11-00 to 15-00 Rolls Royce, Filton.