Choosing effective methods for design diversity - How to progress from intuition to science

Design diversity is a popular defence against design faults in safety critical systems. Design diversity is at times pursued by simply isolating the development teams of the different versions, but it is presumably better to "force" diversity, by appropriate prescriptions to the teams. There are many ways of forcing diversity. Yet, managers who have to choose a cost-effective combination of these have little guidance except their own intuition. We argue the need for more scientifically based recommendations, and outline the problems with producing them. We focus on what we think is the standard basis for most recommendations: the belief that, in order to produce failure diversity among versions, project decisions should aim at causing "diversity" among the faults in the versions. We attempt to clarify what these beliefs mean, in which cases they may be justified and how they can be checked or disproved experimentally

Design diversity: an update from research on reliability modelling

Diversity between redundant subsystems is, in various forms, a common design approach for improving system dependability. Its value in the case of software-based systems is still controversial. This paper gives an overview of reliability modelling work we carried out in recent projects on design diversity, presented in the context of previous knowledge and practice. These results provide additional insight for decisions in applying diversity and in assessing diverseredundant systems. A general observation is that, just as diversity is a very general design approach, the models of diversity can help conceptual understanding of a range of different situations. We summarise results in the general modelling of common-mode failure, in inference from observed failure data, and in decision-making for diversity in development.

An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of 'Forcing Diversity' Based on a Large Population of Diverse Programs

Use of diverse software components is a viable defence against common-mode failures in redundant softwarebased systems. Various forms of "Diversity-Seeking Decisions" (“DSDs”) can be applied to the process of developing, or procuring, redundant components, to improve the chances of the resulting components not failing on the same demands. An open question is how effective these decisions, and their combinations, are for achieving large enough reliability gains. Using a large population of software programs, we studied experimentally the effectiveness of specific "DSDs" (and their combinations) mandating differences between redundant components. Some of these combinations produced much better improvements in system probability of failure per demand (PFD) than "uncontrolled" diversity did. Yet, our findings suggest that the gains from such "DSDs" vary significantly between them and between the application problems studied. The relationship between DSDs and system PFD is complex and does not allow for simple universal rules (e.g. "the more diversity the better") to apply

A list of websites and reading materials on strategy & complexity

The list has been developed based on a broad interpretation of the subject of ‘strategy & complexity’. Resources will therefore more, or less directly relate to ‘being strategic in the face of complexity’. Many of the articles and reports referred to in the attached bibliography can be accessed and downloaded from the internet. Most books can be found at amazon.com where you will often find a number of book reviews and summaries as well. Sometimes, reading the reviews will suffice and will give you the essence of the contents of the book after which you do not need to buy it. If the book looks interesting enough, buying options are easy

Improving case study research in medical education: A systematised review

Context:Case study research (CSR) is a research approach that guides holistic investigation of a real phenomenon. This approach may be useful in medical education to provide critical analyses of teaching and learning, and to reveal the underlying elements of leadership and innovation. There are variations in the definition, design and choice of methods, which may diminish the value of CSR as a form of inquiry.Objectives:This paper reports an analysis of CSR papers in the medical education literature. The review aims to describe how CSR has been used and how more consistency might be achieved to promote understanding and value.Methods:A systematised review was undertaken to quantify the number of CSR articles published in scholarly medical education journals over the last 10 years. A typology of CSR proposed by Thomas and Myers to integrate the various ways in which CSR is constructed was applied.Results:Of the 362 full‐text articles assessed, 290 were excluded as they did not meet the eligibility criteria; 76 of these were titled ‘case study’. Of the 72 included articles, 50 used single‐case and 22 multi‐case design; 46 connected with theory and 26 were atheoretical. In some articles it was unclear what the subject was or how the subject was being analysed.Conclusions:In this study, more articles titled ‘case study’ failed than succeeded in meeting the eligibility criteria. Well‐structured, clearly written CSR in medical education has the potential to increase understanding of more complex situations, but this review shows there is considerable variation in how it is conducted, which potentially limits its utility and translation into education practice. Case study research might be of more value in medical education if researchers were to follow more consistently principles of design, and harness rich observation with connection of ideas and knowledge to engage the reader in what is most interesting