An Evolutionary Perspective on Control in IS Development Projects

Projects in the field of Information Systems Development (ISD) are particularly prone to failure because they are complex in many respects. To increase success of ISD projects, researchers and practitioners usually recommend the implementation of control. The traditional view on control involves two parties: a controller executing control and one or more controllees being controlled. To better understand why control effectiveness has not significantly improved over the last decades, this paper gives a chronological overview of existing literature on ISD project control. We find that so far, research has been strongly focusing on controller related aspects such as the creation of control portfolios. This, however, neglects that the effectiveness of control is highly dependent on the controllees’ perception and willingness to actively commit to implemented controls. We argue that a more holistic understanding of the controllee perspective on control is needed and discuss implications for theory and practic

Controller tuning by means of evolutionary multiobjective optimization: current trends and applications

Control engineering problems are generally multi-objective problems; meaning that there are several specifications and requirements that must be fulfilled. A traditional approach for calculating a solution with the desired trade-off is to define an optimisation statement. Multi-objective optimisation techniques deal with this problem from a particular perspective and search for a set of potentially preferable solutions; the designer may then analyse the trade-offs among them, and select the best solution according to his/her preferences. In this paper, this design procedure based on evolutionary multiobjective optimisation (EMO) is presented and significant applications on controller tuning are discussed. Throughout this paper it is noticeable that EMO research has been developing towards different optimisation statements, but these statements are not commonly used in controller tuning. Gaps between EMO research and EMO applications on controller tuning are therefore detected and suggested as potential trends for research.The first author is grateful for the hospitality and availability of the UTC at the University of Sheffield during his academic research stay at 2011; especially to Dr. P.J. Fleming for his valuable comments and insights in the development of this paper. This work was partially supported by Grant FPI-2010/19 and project PAID-2011/2732 from the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia and projects TIN2011-28082 and ENE2011-25900 from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.Reynoso Meza, G.; Blasco Ferragud, FX.; Sanchís Saez, J.; Martínez Iranzo, MA. (2014). Controller tuning by means of evolutionary multiobjective optimization: current trends and applications. Control Engineering Practice. 28:58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2014.03.003S58732

Session 5: Development, Neuroscience and Evolutionary Psychology

Proceedings of the Pittsburgh Workshop in History and Philosophy of Biology, Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, March 23-24 2001 Session 5: Development, Neuroscience and Evolutionary Psycholog

Building dynamic capabilities through operations strategy: an empirical example

This paper suggests that the implementation of an effective operations strategy process is one of the necessary antecedents to the development of dynamic capabilities within an organisation and that once established, dynamic capabilities and operations strategy process settle into a symbiotic relationship. Key terms and a model of operations strategy process are proposed from literature as a framework for analysing data from a longitudinal case study with a UK based manufacturer of construction materials

Proceedings of the ECCS 2005 satellite workshop: embracing complexity in design - Paris 17 November 2005

Embracing complexity in design is one of the critical issues and challenges of the 21st century. As the realization grows that design activities and artefacts display properties associated with complex adaptive systems, so grows the need to use complexity concepts and methods to understand these properties and inform the design of better artifacts. It is a great challenge because complexity science represents an epistemological and methodological swift that promises a holistic approach in the understanding and operational support of design. But design is also a major contributor in complexity research. Design science is concerned with problems that are fundamental in the sciences in general and complexity sciences in particular. For instance, design has been perceived and studied as a ubiquitous activity inherent in every human activity, as the art of generating hypotheses, as a type of experiment, or as a creative co-evolutionary process. Design science and its established approaches and practices can be a great source for advancement and innovation in complexity science. These proceedings are the result of a workshop organized as part of the activities of a UK government AHRB/EPSRC funded research cluster called Embracing Complexity in Design (www.complexityanddesign.net) and the European Conference in Complex Systems (complexsystems.lri.fr). Embracing complexity in design is one of the critical issues and challenges of the 21st century. As the realization grows that design activities and artefacts display properties associated with complex adaptive systems, so grows the need to use complexity concepts and methods to understand these properties and inform the design of better artifacts. It is a great challenge because complexity science represents an epistemological and methodological swift that promises a holistic approach in the understanding and operational support of design. But design is also a major contributor in complexity research. Design science is concerned with problems that are fundamental in the sciences in general and complexity sciences in particular. For instance, design has been perceived and studied as a ubiquitous activity inherent in every human activity, as the art of generating hypotheses, as a type of experiment, or as a creative co-evolutionary process. Design science and its established approaches and practices can be a great source for advancement and innovation in complexity science. These proceedings are the result of a workshop organized as part of the activities of a UK government AHRB/EPSRC funded research cluster called Embracing Complexity in Design (www.complexityanddesign.net) and the European Conference in Complex Systems (complexsystems.lri.fr)

On the right track? : evaluation as a tool to guide spatial transitions

Spatial developments are becoming more and more non-linear, dynamic and complex with a wide range of possible actors. The awareness of uncertainty in spatial planning is growing and therefore, projects need to integrate a high level of flexibility. But at the same time, a growing demand for taking more informed and well-argued decisions is noticeable. Predictions out of the ‘best estimated model’ are no longer credible and no longer accepted, because they are too fragile and uncertain. How can we keep these long-lasting, multi-actor projects in permanent transition on the right track? This article presents an evaluation methodology that goes beyond the traditional, rational evaluation attitudes with a low level of flexibility being too linear to match the current spatial developments. There is a need for more interrelated, alert and flexible means of evaluation, co-evolving with the processes and current dynamics in spatial planning. Therefore, different evaluation approaches are introduced, depending on the specific interdependencies of the object of evaluation and its context. Subsequently, the theoretical framework is translated towards a more practical level. A case study conducted in Flanders illustrates the current spatial developments and a possible evaluation approach, incorporated from the beginning of the process, to guide this kind of projects