PhD Candidate: Timo LAUDAN, EADS Innovation Works - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

PhD Candidate: Timo LAUDAN, EADS Innovation Works

Description:

Context-Oriented Product Development: Collaboration between the Business and Engineering Domain An Investigation with a Focus on Project- and Engineering-Based ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:43
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 52
Provided by: TimoL9
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: PhD Candidate: Timo LAUDAN, EADS Innovation Works


1
Context-Oriented Product Development
Collaboration between the Business and
Engineering DomainAn Investigation with a Focus
on Project- and Engineering-Based
Organisations Defence 14th November 2008,
Grenoble
  • PhD Candidate Timo LAUDAN, EADS Innovation
    Works
  • President Prof. Manfred BROY, Technical
    University of Munich
  • Reviewers Prof. Benoit EYNARD, Université de
    Technologie Compiègne Prof. Pascal Le
    MASSON, Ecole des Mines de Paris
  • Industrial Supervisors Philippe HOMSI, Airbus
    SAS (Unfortunately not here today)
  • Dr. Michel DUREIGNE, EADS Innovation Works
  • Axel MAURITZ, EADS Innovation Works
  • Scientific Supervisors Prof. Michel TOLLENAERE,
    University of Grenoble, G-SCOP
  • Prof. Mickaël GARDONI, University of
    Strasbourg (INSA), LGeCo

2
Presentation Outline
1
2
3
4
IndustrialApplicationCases
ResearchContext
ConceptualSolution
IndustryObservation
Results Perspectives
5
3
Presentation Outline
gtgt Establish the research question and conduction
of research proposal, synopsis on reviewed
theories
1
  1. Research Organisation
  2. Research Scope
  3. Research Opportunity
  4. Research Question
  5. Research Methodology
  6. Theory - Reviewed Concepts

ResearchContext
4
Research Organisation
  • Working Environment
  • EADS Innovation Works
  • Technical Capability Centre Simulation, IT and
    Systems Engineering
  • Team Systems Engineering lead by Axel MAURITZ
  • Doctoral Contract since 2004 Since May 2008
    employee
  • Supervising Universities
  • Grenoble, G-SCOP Prof. Michel Tollenaere
  • Strasbourg, LGeCo Prof. Mickaël Gardoni
  • Sponsor of the Thesis
  • Funded by Airbus Philippe Homsi, Head of
    Modelling and Simulation
  • Empirical Study Environment
  • European Integrated Project (FP6) that integrates
    major aeronautical key-players
  • Project task Formalise and harmonise aero
    industries business intents and engineering
    definitions
  • Empirical study Frame to study challenges on the
    scale of a collaborative project

5
Research Scope
  • Collaboration between Business and Product
    Development (PD) Teams establishing the top-level
    product definition (requirement analysis)
  • in context Project-and engineering-based
    Organisation

Business
BusinessIntents
Top-levelProductDefinition
PD Teams
Did you get the message?
ProductRequirements
Understand related works and challenges to put
forward for research opportunity
6
Research Opportunity (1/2)
  • Context
  • Traditional requirements analysis models focused
    on system- and user interactions
  • Much efforts in particular industrial - on
    logical breakdown, management, dissemination and
    proof on the level of implementation of
    requirements without being strongly connected to
    the organisation and its business intents
  • Related Work
  • Focus on front-end negotiations early
    requirements analysis activities concerned with
    reconciling business problems, opportunities and
    product (high-level) requirements
  • Intentional modelling semi-formal and formal
    approaches using the concept of goals to develop
    coherent requirement models that aims at
    increasing rationalisation and confidence in
    engineering definitions

7
Research Opportunity (2/2)
  • Challenges - Literature shows that
  • Coordination and communication gap in project-and
    engineering based organisations, especially
    between stakeholders and developers (Karlson et
    al. 2007)
  • Lack of means that enables to perform stakeholder
    cooperation within the product development
    process (Kavakli/Loucopoulos 2003)
  • Problem of supporting cross-community in
    knowledge creation and sharing is relatively
    under-investigated (Novak/Wurst 2004)
  • Formalisms in early requirements analysis fall
    short in establishing usable intentional
    structures to be used non-experts (Lamsweerde
    2004)

Research Opportunity Communication, coordination
and knowledge representation in cross-community
constellations in the phase of requirements
analysis
8
Research QuestionProblematic
  • Research Question
  • How to organise collaboration and knowledge
    conversion between business management and PD
    Teams concerned with the elaboration of top-level
    product requirements?
  • In context of the research question
  • How to find coherence (adequacy, completeness and
    consistency) within the evolution of the
    projects product on the level of business and
    engineering?
  • How to maintain and trace knowledge evolutions in
    context of the projects product between business
    and engineering?

9
Research Methodology
Action Research - Coupling both research and
action A closed loop of inductive and deductive
reasoning, i.e. a cognitive shift from research
design to design practice and conversely using
synergies of three channels of cognition
(spontaneous observations, organized
observations, and experimentations) and by this
activate a hybrid form of action research.
10
Theory (1/3) Reviewed Concepts to Study
Collaboration and Knowledge Conversion in
Cross-Communities Key Features
  • Collaboration To understand principles of social
    interaction
  • Two individuals or larger collectives of
    individuals (communities) OED 2003, Bahrdt 2000
  • Modes of communication, cooperation and
    coordination towards the established objective
    for collaboration (group awareness, emergence)
    cf. Elsen 2007
  • Knowledge To understand the object of
    collaboration
  • Knowledge should be exchanged within the
    objective of collaboration Elsen 2007
    (different natures of knowledge, different
    knowledge conversion modes)
  • Context To understand how other people can
    understand and learn from knowledge in its
    initial meaning
  • Essential for knowledge conversion of
    organisation and its actors for taking
    appropriate and valuable actions Klemke 1999
    Kivijärvi 2004
  • Ontology To understand how to coordinate and
    organise knowledge conversion
  • Offering a skeletal and relational organisation
    for knowledge bases associated to represent
    different viewpoints based on the organisational
    level and area Huettenegger 2006 Swartout et al
    1996

11
Theory (2/3) Reviewed Concepts to Study
Collaboration and Knowledge Conversion in
Cross-Communities Key Features
  • Organisation To understand the frame in which
    collaboration appears
  • Organisations are immense interpretation
    systems cf. Daft/Weick 1984 Baumard 1999
  • Organisation and the smaller unit community
    provide the frame in which collaboration could
    occur
  • Challenges reaching knowledge conversion in
    cross-communities (Novak/Wurst 2004)
  • Different thought worlds
  • Different knowledge perspectives
  • Establish a shared Context of Knowing
  • Perspective Making and Perspective Taking
  • Boundary Objects (Interpretable Knowledge
    artefacts)
  • Visualisation of cross-community knowledge
    perspectives

12
Theory (3/3)Conclusion on Reviewed Concepts
  • All concepts fulfil a particular role within the
    organisational context essential to study
    cross-community collaboration and knowledge
    conversion
  • How are cross-community challenges characterised
    in the real-world?

13
Presentation Outline
gtgt Develop the industrial problematic and need
against the background of the research question
2
  1. Empirical Context
  2. Conduction of Empirical Study
  3. Results of the Empirical Study

IndustryObservation
ExpertsInterviews
14
Empirical Context
  • VIVACE (Acronym Value Improvement through a
    Virtual Aeronautical Collaborative Enterprise)
  • Integrated European Research Project
  • Resources lasted 4years (2004-2007), 75m
  • Project Coordinator Philippe HOMSI (Airbus)
  • 62 partners Aero Companies (29), IT Technology
    Vendors (12), Research Centers (5), universities
    (14), Others (2)
  • 4 Sub projects 23 work packages, 102 tasks, 249
    sub-tasks
  • 300 deliverables

15
Conduction of the Study (1/2)Collect Data
  • Methodological Choice Qualitative research, a
    field observing and open facilitated research
    method (semi-structured incl. pre-tests)
  • 17 Experts interviews (mostly at the place) June
    06 Feb 07
  • Interview Profile
  • 6 nationalities (France, Germany, Sweden,
    England, Netherlands, Italy)
  • Project roles (project office, exploitation
    manager, sub-project, work-package and task
    leader)
  • Types of organisations (Aero companies, Research
    Centres, project office)
  • Interview time Total 14h
  • Transliterated Material 70pp. (interview
    protocols), 3 weeks for transliteration

Captured a broad basis of data in the perimeter
of the empirical study environment VIVACE
16
Conduction of the Study (2/2)Structure
Interpret Data
  • Evaluation of surveyed information in a
    pre-selected and existing categorization system
    (4dimensions Technical, Social, Resource,
    Environment 17variables) found in theory (2
    month, 40pp.)

17
Results of the Study (1/3)
Interview data documented in common interview
protocols
0
Interview data
InterviewProtocols
0
Structured hypothesis in context of an
inter-organisational European research project
1
Structured Interpreted
1
  • Empirical Challenges Abstracted Result
  • Different Backgrounds (variety of business
    approaches, objectives, cultures, working
    principles, )
  • Missing common/shared perspective (visibility on
    the project shared view on business intents)
  • Environmental Influences (external factors, lack
    of early involvement of business customer and
    end-user)

Abstracted generalised
2
2
3
Outline industrial problematic need based on
results from Step 0,1,2 and against the
background of the research question
18
Results (2/3)Industrial Problematic in Context
of the Research Question
3
  • P.1 Business intents are stored in different
    information formats and spaces
  • P2. Flat and non-contextualized representation
    (macro-viewing on documents) of business intents
  • P3. PD teams often loose the justifying
    connection to business intents throughout the PD
    process
  • P4. PD teams are often unsure if they implemented
    business intents completely and consistent in
    forms of requirements
  • P5. Difficult to prove and trust the correct
    implementation of business intents in engineering
    processes and information spaces

PLC - Project Life Cycle
Reconciliation process of business intents and
specified requirements is challenging
19
Results (3/3)Industrial Need in Context of the
Research Question
3
  • N1. Methodological approach to structure,
    organise and specify perceived business intents
    in alignment with specified requirements
  • ? To answer Problem P1. P2. in terms of
    High-level product orientation and collaboration
    baseline towards which business and PD teams can
    activate all their efforts
  • N2. Traceability mechanisms
  • ? To answer Problem P3. P4 in terms of Trace
    and update business intents and requirements
  • N3. Goal conflict and resolution mechanisms
  • ? To answer P5. in terms of Relaxation and
    stabilisation of business intents before entering
    into heavy specifications
  • N4. Evaluation engine
  • ? To answer P5. in terms of Measure and
    estimate business intent fulfilment in relation
    with assigned requirements

? Avoid late and heavy iterations in progressive
stages of the PD process ? Increase Transparency
improve cross-community collaboration
20
Presentation Outline
gtgt Combine empirical needs from industry
observation with theoriesand come out with a
conceptual solution serving collaborative projects
3
ConceptualSolution
  1. Construction of Conceptual Solution

ResearchFramework
21
Conceptual Solution Model (1/8)Confluence of
Reviewed Concepts
Knowledge-CoCoOn (Collaboration, Context,
Ontology) is a formation consolidating different
concepts to establish an environment for
knowledge conversion (share create) in context
of cross-community collaboration.
22
Conceptual Solution Model (2/8)Structure,
organise, specify and deploy business intents on
principles provided by Knowledge-CoCoOn
Our solution proposition 0perationalising the
conceptual model of Knowledge-CoCoOn within a
Business Needs Expectation Perspective (BNE-P)
Business Needs Expectation Perspective (BNE-P)
Model
Goal-tree structure
23
Conceptual Solution Model (3/8)The Role of
Collaboration in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • Collaboration - Define principles of social
    interaction
  • Answer to Need N1. Methodological approach to
    organize and specify high-level product
    definition
  • Solution Element
  • Principle collaboration in context of
    project-and engineering-based organisation

24
Conceptual Solution Model (4/8) The Role of
Collaboration in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • Collaboration - Define principles of social
    interaction
  • Answer to Need N1. Methodological approach to
    organize and specify high-level product
    definition
  • Solution Element
  • How organisational structures consider the
    environment (delimitation)

25
Conceptual Solution Model (5/8) The Role of
Ontology in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • Ontology - Coordination of Knowledge Conversion
  • Answer to Need N1. Methodological approach to
    organize and specify high-level product
    definition N2. Traceability Mechanisms
  • Solution Element
  • Providing structure and relationships organizing
    the synthesis of complex business information
    spaces (Perspective Making)

26
Conceptual Solution Model (6/8) The Role of
Ontology in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • Ontology - Coordination of Knowledge Conversion
  • Answer to Need N1. Methodological approach to
    organize and specify high-level product
    definition N2. Traceability Mechanisms
  • Solution Element
  • Defining transition points (that is
    collaboration objective) in a cross-community
    (Perspective Taking) allowing to trace and update
    knowledge between business engineering

27
Conceptual Solution Model (7/8) The Role of
Context in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • TPBV Total Perceived Business Value
  • Expectation Value Degree level of change in
    product feature capable to create the expected
    value, benefit for business management and its
    actors
  • Context - Communication of Knowledge
  • Answer to need N3. Goal Conflict and resolution
    mechanisms, N4. Evaluation Engine
  • Solution Element
  • Definition of Business Intent as basis for
    prioritising decompositions of product features

28
Conceptual Solution Model (8/8) The Role of
Context in the BNE-P Model
Contribution in BNE-P Model
  • Context - Communication of Knowledge
  • Answer to need N1. Methodological to approach to
    organize and specify high-level product
    definition
  • Solution Element
  • Nature of Message anchoring the concept of BNE
    for specifying contents (classes, attributes) of
    a business intent

29
Presentation Outline
gtgt Experimentation and Feedbacks applying the
conceptual solutionof the Business in Practice
4
  1. Overview experiments
  2. Experiment 1- Test the implementation of BNE-P
    Model Classes and Attributes
  3. Experiment 2- Test valuation and traceability
    made possible by the BNE-P Model
  4. Induced Developments

IndustrialApplicationCases
ApplicationCase
30
Three Different Experiments
Test the implementation of BNE-P Model Classes
and Attributes through an integration process
1
VIVACE
Test Traceability and valuation made possible by
the BNE-P Model on the scale of one business
intent
2
Study the possible application of BNE-P model for
the development of coherent requirements
specifications upstream in an EADS product
development project
EADS(ProspectiveResearches)
3
31
Experiment 1 (1/5)VIVACE Context
  • In the second half of VIVACE (first year of the
    thesis) a project task was launched which allowed
    us to apply the developed BNE-P model
  • At that stage (partially) business intents and
    engineering definitions were established, but in
    an individual mode (different structures, spread
    over different types of documents, )

32
Experiment 1 (2/5)VIVACE BNE-P Model Definition
BusinessCommunity
EngineeringCommunity
  • Aero companies addressed business intents
    encompassed a large scope of investigation
  • Differentiated a BNE-Perspective within
  • Context (BNE-C) establishing the overall
    business context
  • Focus (BNE-F) establishes and details a specific
    part of BNE-C in forms sub-objectives and
    benefits
  • Allowed Aero companies to concretise their
    BNE-Perspective within a context and one or more
    focuses to be answered by PD teams (research
    centres, universities).

33
Experiment 1 (3/5) VIVACE BNE-P Model
Implementation
  • Process of Integration
  • Specifying business intents in BNE-Ps and its
    relating implementation in forms of engineering
    definitions
  • Mixture of interviewing, document analysis,
    documentation and reviewing cycles with
    responsible BNE-P leaders

34
Experiment 1 (4/5)VIVACE Methodological Review
  • Achievements
  • Valid proof of model classes and attributes
    defined for the extended consideration of a BNE-P
    differentiated in context and focus
  • Integration process was applicable on the full
    scale of VIVACE, with some challenges
  • Support of people (missionary work)
  • Availability and adequacy of information
  • Limitations
  • Model not experienced in the set-up and execution
    phase of the project
  • Transversal analysis across BNE-P for matters of
    coherency analysis

The absence establishing business perspectivemay
led to over- under, or miss-specification
35
Experiment 1 (5/5)VIVACE Feedbacks against
empirical findings
Summary of Feedbacks (gained from interviews)
against empirical findings (problems and needs)
and in context of the research question
N1. Methodological approach to structure, organise and specify perceived business intents in alignment with specified requirements
P1. Business intents are stored in different information formats and spaces P2. Flat and non-contextualized representation (macro-viewing on documents) of business intents Helps to get common understandings of and transparency on business intents addressed and functional components developed. The specification of business intents in BNE-P helps in communication towards business management inside the partners company. Identified as key deliverable supporting exploitation phase enabling a logic of business value and engineering capability view The model could help to reach common value-oriented understandings more efficiently
36
Experiment 2 (1/8)VIVACE Context
  • Test 1/ evaluation and 2/ traceability mechanisms
    made possible through the BNE-P Model on one
    VIVACE BNE-P specified within Experiment 1
  • Performed together with a representative project
    member under study environment conditions

BNE-P Model
Objective
Benefit
Sub-Objective
1/ Evaluation of a goal tree
Requirements
2/ Trace consequences of evaluations towards
engineering structures
37
Experiment 2 (2/8)VIVACE 1/ Evaluation of
Soft-Goal Tree
  • Characterisation of evaluation criteria using
    utility value function and uncertain information
    (interviews)
  • Evaluation principle using BNE-P goal tree
    structures
  • Temporal distinctions t0 (current business),
    t1 (intermediate), T End (targeted situation)
    using uncertain information
  • Zones Current Zone, Improvement Zone, Targeted
    Zone

38
Experiment 2 (3/8)VIVACE 1/ Evaluation of
Soft-Goal Tree
Implementation of Goal Tree (In-house Software
for Probabilistic Evaluations)
39
Experiment 2 (4/8)VIVACE 1/ Evaluation of
Soft-Goal Tree
Illustrations of Probabilistic Evaluation Results
in the Goal-Tree
40
Experiment 2 (5/8)VIVACE 2/ Tracing Mechanisms
Establish captured relationships between Boundary
objects, i.e. benefits and specified requirements
Evaluatedgoal-tree
SpecifiedRequirements
CreateRelation(based oninterviews)
SaveRelation
41
Experiment 2 (6/8)VIVACE 2/ Tracing Mechanisms
Scenario to perform tracings on unsatisfied
business intent areas
BNE-P Evaluation Model
Specified Requirements
1
Goal-Tree Analysis
2
Trace consequences of evaluations towards
engineering structures
42
Experiment 2 (7/8)VIVACE Review
Summary of Feedbacks (gained from interviews)
against empirical findings (problems and needs)
and against the background of the research
question
N2. Traceability mechanisms N3. Goal conflict resolution mechanisms N4. Evaluation engine
P3. PD teams often loose the justifying connection P4. PD teams are often unsure if they implemented Capable to perform critical path analysis Prepare a situational picture in context of a business intent (e.g. serve moving business targets (Top-down) or difficulties in implementing engineering definitions (bottom.-up))
43
Experiment 2 (8/8)VIVACE Review
N2. Traceability mechanisms N3. Goal conflict resolution mechanisms N4. Evaluation engine
P5. Difficult to prove and trust the correct implementation Implicit proof only BNE-P provide evaluation structures In real case situation higher negotiation effort characterising evaluation criteria Concept of uncertainty helpful, but time-consuming defining it More confidence providing figures using uncertain information
44
Induced DevelopmentsUpdated Prototypical
Environment
Deploy requirements
Structure, specify organise business intent
Trace update
Perform situational Analysis
Proof Coherency
45
Presentation Outline
  1. Contributions and Criticisms
  2. Complementary Research Issues
  3. Concluding Remark

Results Perspectives
5
46
Contribution and Criticisms (1/3)
  • Result 1 BNE-P Model
  • Contribution to Theory
  • A knowledge-driven proposal to intentional
    modelling structuring, organising and deploying
    business intents informally
  • Identification of goal-trees and resulting
    specified requirements to serve collaboration
    scenes at the interface of business and
    engineering
  • Enables a first proof of coherency before
    entering into heavier formalisms
  • Can provide attributes that relate to project
    management information and keep the link to
    business engineering information spaces
    (documents)
  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)
  • Clear lack of integration with stronger
    formalisms in intentional modelling.
  • ? Integrate strategies to perform transversal
    proof of coherencyamongst a number of goal-trees
    organised in various BNE-Ps
  • Proof of different interdependency types amongst
    BNE-P organised goal-structures, e.g. semantic,
    cost/value, time

47
Contribution and Criticisms (2/3)
  • Result 1 BNE-P Model (Experiment 13)
  • Contribution to Practice
  • VIVACE Increased visibility / transparency on
    the VIVACE project (from the inside outside) in
    the closure phase of the project
  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)
  • VIVACE Clear lack of experimentations in set-up
    and execution phase of project
  • ? Investigate the BNE-P Model along the PD
    process and include phase-specific surveys
    interview cycles, questionnaires, etc.
  • ? To investigate business and engineering domain
    members behaviours during collaborations and
    knowledge conversions

48
Contribution and Criticisms (3/3)
  • Result 2 BNE-P Evaluative Model including
    Traceability
  • Contribution to Theory/Practice (Experiment 2)
  • Orientation on value adding activities improved
    indication of expected functional qualities and
    orientation on prioritised business communities
    intentional structures
  • Reflexive Traceability The BNE-P evaluative
    model provides channels for cross-domain
    associativity (introduced as boundary objects)
    offering a logic to follow in bottom-up or
    top-down fashions throughout intentional (BNE-P)
    and engineering information structures
  • Perspectives (limitations and open issues)
  • Clear lack of proof under operational conditions
  • Open issues
  • Integration with stakeholder analysis approaches
  • Integration with higher level metrics (on
    enterprise level)
  • Scalability (balancing appropriate method and
    tool assembly in context of the collaboration
    challenge)

49
Complementary Research Issues
  • BNE-P Model
  • Investigate BNE-P in ideation phase that allows
    researches (and RT strategy) to prepare
    argumentation baseline towards new innovations.
  • Investigate BNE-P on a different scale, e.g. SME
  • In particular, what are relevances of BNE-P if
    we face a non collaborative situation? That means
    business intent and formalisation in forms of
    specified requirements is done by the same
    person.
  • Empirical Study Results
  • Validate surveyed results in context of other
    projects (same or different context)
  • Use surveyed material for quantitative research
    (e.g. compiling questionnaire with closed
    questions) and proof hypothesis and establish
    generalised statements

50
Concluding Remark
  • The presented work advocates the point that if
    current intentional models fall short in
    establishing usable intentional structures that
    are able to provide the transparency for
    supporting continuously business-engineering
    evolutions within collaboration and knowledge
    conversions along a PD process, then it could be
    valuable to have a mediating instance that
    organises collaboration and knowledge
    conversions.
  • It can act (promote) in front of stronger
    formalisms in terms of coherency development in
    requirements.
  • It could strengthen negotiation forces and
    group-awareness among business and engineering
    community.
  • It provides organisation of knowledge bases, i.e.
    community-related information spaces and anchors
    a value-oriented definition of business intent.
  • It supports not only front-end negotiations, but
    also establishes continuous interactivity
    structures and strengthens product development
    performance in terms of increasing reactivity and
    group-awareness between business-engineering.

51
  • Many Thanks!
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com