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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

'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.

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 * 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.
+* Now need to provide 6 page paper by 10 June.  More likely to be 12 pages.
 === Workshop ===