Difference between revisions of "SSE Meeting 31"
(→Paper for ASEC 2018) |
(→Paper format) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Paper submitted following review and updates. Acceptance not yet confirmed. Expect minor changes may be needed, but feel overall paper is good. | Paper submitted following review and updates. Acceptance not yet confirmed. Expect minor changes may be needed, but feel overall paper is good. | ||
| − | == | + | == Methodology == |
| − | The ASEC paper | + | The format and content of the ASEC paper was seen as a good way forward for general work. |
| − | + | Further work on 'What happened before, during and after the work in the paper will be useful in mapping out the process/lifecycle for development and use of services. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | The Systems Engineering Handbook, SeBOK and ISO/IEC 15288 were considered for their contribution, but found to cover services as a way of maintaining a system in service, rather than providing a service. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
== How to express the findings == | == How to express the findings == | ||
Revision as of 10:01, 18 July 2018
Contents |
Attendees
Andrew Farncombe, Alan Crawford, Simon Wright, John Davies, Neil Hunter.
Paper for ASEC 2018
Paper submitted following review and updates. Acceptance not yet confirmed. Expect minor changes may be needed, but feel overall paper is good.
Methodology
The format and content of the ASEC paper was seen as a good way forward for general work.
Further work on 'What happened before, during and after the work in the paper will be useful in mapping out the process/lifecycle for development and use of services.
The Systems Engineering Handbook, SeBOK and ISO/IEC 15288 were considered for their contribution, but found to cover services as a way of maintaining a system in service, rather than providing a service.
How to express the findings
- Four different white-board briefs of our contribution were produced and discussed. It was agreed that considering two views of the system - one service oriented and one system oriented could be used to cover the four different briefs, and provide strong message.
- It was agreed that the major contribution to be expressed in this paper is for the analysis of Services in terms of Context Diagrams, Stakeholder Analysis, Behaviour Analysis, Context Analysis and Structure Analysis are different if you take Service-Centric views against what you get if you take a System-Centric views.
- The difference compared to Architecture Frameworks, that include Service views such as MoDAF, is that AFs are looking at services as system components, whereas we are looking at the enterprise or business from two views - one Service-Centric and one System-Centric.
- Hence for example a Service-Centric Stakeholder Analysis will be similar (and use the same or similar methods) to a System-Centric Stakeholder Analysis but focus on the Service aspects and provide a richer set of outputs.
- Comparison was made with Product Service Systems (Tukker) which deals with a range of Services from Pure Service to Pure Product.
- It was noted that the standard Service Oriented Architecture relating Business Model to Services provided by System Components fits into our wider
Actions
- SW – to develop draft ASEC2018 paper .
- IC to arrange phone in Tuesday 29 May 14-00 Review of draft paper
- IC to arrange phone in Tuesday 5th June 14-00 Review of updated paper
Next Meeting
Monday 24 September 2018, 10-30 to 14-30, Rolls Royce, Filton, Bristol.
