3 research outputs found
Evaluation and development models for business processes
Most organisations are working hard to improve their performance and to achieve competitive advantage over their rivals. They may accomplish these ambitions through carrying out their business processes more effectively. Hence it is important to consider such processes and look for ways in which they can be improved. Any organisational business process encompasses several elements that interact and collaborate with each other to achieve the required objectives. These elements can be classified into hard aspects, which deal with tangible issues related to the software system or the technology in general, and soft aspects, which deal with issues related to the human part of the business process. If the business process needs to be analysed and redesigned to improve its performance, it is important to use a suitable approach or intervention that takes into account all of these elements. This thesis proposes an approach to investigate organisational business processes by considering both soft and hard aspects. The approach, Soft Workflow Modelling (SWfM), is developed as a result of reviewing several workflow products and models using a developed workflow perspectives framework which involves several perspectives covering the soft and hard aspects of the workflow system. The SWfM approach models the organisational business process as a workflow system by handling the various perspectives of the workflow perspectives framework. This approach combines the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) with the Unified Modelling Language (UML), as a standard modelling language of the object-oriented paradigm. The basic framework adopted is that of SSM with the inclusion of UML diagrams and techniques to deal with the aspects that SSM cannot handle. The approach also supports SSM by providing a developed tool to assist in constructing a conceptual model which is considered as the basis to model the workflow system. A case study is developed for illustrative purposes.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo
Dialectic approach to multidisciplinary practice in requirements engineering
This thesis develops an approach that supports multidisciplinary practice in requirements
engineering. It is argued that multidisciplinary requirements engineering practice is
ineffective, and some specific problems for multidisciplinary practice are identified. It is also
suggested that the incommensurability of conflicting paradigms is an underlying cause of the
problems in multidisciplinary practice, and a number of criteria for support to overcome
such problems are proposed.
A form of methodological support, which it is claimed may help overcome some of the
problems associated with multidisciplinary practice in requirements engineering, is
developed. This methodological support takes the form of a dialectic process, and its
associated products, which is conceptualised and then operationalised. As an illustration of
the methodological support offered to multidisciplinary practice, the operationalisation of
the dialectic process is applied to requirements constructed by the use of two different
requirements engineering techniques from two different disciplines (representing two
different paradigms), in the domain of Accident and Emergency healthcare. Finally, the
application of the operationalisation of the dialectic process is assessed with respect to the
criteria for support for multidisciplinary practice proposed earlier, and this assessment is
used to reconceptualise the dialectic process. The limitations of the research are identified,
and possibilities for future work proposed.
This thesis is aimed primarily at the requirements engineering community, and in
particular the practising requirements engineer. It makes two contributions to knowledge
supporting the practices of requirements engineering. First, the thesis contributes two types
of substantive discipline knowledge: an explanation of why multidisciplinary practice in
requirements engineering is problematic; and the proposal of criteria for support to allay the
difficulties of multidisciplinary practice. It is suggested that these criteria might be used in
the development of new types of support to overcomes such difficulties, or in the assessmment
of new requirements engineering techniques that claim to address multidisciplinary practice.
Second, the thesis contributes methodological knowledge in the form of a dialectic
approach that offers a new way of reasoning about requirements engineering. This
methodological knowledge takes two forms: a generic dialectic approach that might be
applied by requirements engineering practitioners to requirements, generated by a wide range
of requirements engineering techniques, representing alternative paradigms; and a
specific instantiation of the dialectic approach using the MUSE method and the Grounded
Theory method, that might be used in its current form by requirements engineering
practitioners to support their own multidisciplinary practice