ONTOLOGICAL MODELLING TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING OF IS DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES - A Position Paper

Robert T. Hughes, Graham Winstanley, Karl Cox

2010

Abstract

IT projects are known for the high rate at which they fail. Past work by the authors has investigated the building of cognitive causal maps to find and represent what the participants in a project feel are factors that lead to project success or failure. It was found that while agreement can often be reached on the broad causes of failure, there tended to be differences about the precise nature of the identified factors (for example the exact meaning of 'inadequate resources'). The position paper proposes the use of ontological models to enrich and clarify causal maps with information about the classes of object in the real world to which they refer. This would facilitate more effective planning of new projects. An aspiration of the authors is to use the information generated by ontology-enriched causal maps to provide guidance on the tailoring of methodologies, particularly Agile ones, for specific projects.

References

  1. Abdel-Hamid T. K. 1988. Understanding the 7890% syndrome' in software project management: a simulation-based case study, in Journal of Systems and Software. vol. 8, pp. 319-330.
  2. Abels S., Ahlemann F., Hausman K., and. Strickman J. 2006. PROMONT - A project management ontology as a reference for virtual project organizations," in OTM Workshops, pp. 813-823.
  3. Al-Shehab A 2007 Causal and cognitive mapping methods for the identification of risk in information development projects: PhD dissertation. Brighton: University of Brighton.
  4. Al-Shehab A., Hughes R. T., and Winstanley G. 2005 Facilitating organisational learning through causal mapping techniques in IS/IT project risk management . Lecture Notes in Computer Science Lecture vol. 3782/2005 145-154,Springer-Berlin, pp. 145-154.
  5. Al-Shehab A., Hughes R. T., and Winstanley G 2006 CorMod: a causal mapping approach to identifying project development risk. Proceedings of European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS).
  6. Axelrod R. 1976 Structure of decisions: the cognitive maps of political elites. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press,.
  7. Fitzgerald B., Russo N. L., and O'Kane T. 2003 Software development method tailoring at Motorola, in Communications of the ACM. ACM, vol. 46: pp. 65-70.
  8. Babar A., Cox K., Tosic V., Bleistein S. and Verner, J. 2008 Integrating B-SCP and MAP to manage the evolution of strategic IT requirements. Information and Software Technology. Elsevier. vol. 50. pp. 815-831.
  9. Beck K. and Andres C. 2005. Extreme programming explained: embrace change 2nd ed. Boston, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley
  10. Bleistein S., Aurum A., Cox K., and Ray P. (2004). Strategyoriented alignment in requirements engineering: linking business strategy to requirements of e-business using the SOARE approach. Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology. vol. 36. no. 4. pp. 259-76.
  11. Bleistein S., Cox K., and Verner J. 2006a Validating strategic alignment of organizational IT requirements using goal modelling and problem diagrams. Journal of Systems and Software. vol. 79. no. 3. pp. 362-78.
  12. Bleistein S., Cox K., Verner J., and Phalp K. 2006b B-SCP: a requirements analysis framework for validating strategic alignment of organizational IT based on strategy, context and process, in Information and Software Technology. vol. 48. no. 9. pp. 846-868.
  13. Boehm, B. W. 1991. Software risk management: principles and practices. IEEE Software. : IEEE vol. 1 pp. 32-41.
  14. Chauvin L., Genest D., Loiseau S.2007 Le modèle des cartes cognitives contextuelles Annals du LAMSADE no 8 pp 285-292
  15. De Nicola A., Missikoff M., and Navigli R.2009 A software engineering approach to ontology building. Information Systems. vol. 34: Elsevier, pp. 258-275.
  16. DSDM, 2007. DSDM Atern Pocket Book Ashford: DSDM Consortium
  17. Eden C. 2004 Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. European Journal of Operational Research. vol. 159, pp. 673-686.
  18. Gil Y. and Blythe J. 2000 PLANET: A shareable and reusable ontology for representing plans. Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on representational issues for real-world planning systems at 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence Austin, Texas, USA.
  19. Gruber T. R. 1995. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used in knowledge sharing. Int. J. HumanComputer Studies. Academic Press, vol. 43 pp. 907-928.
  20. Hendy, J., Reeves B. C., Fulop N., Hutchings A., and Masseria C. 2005. Challenges to implementing the national programme for information technology (NPfIT): a qualitative study.British Medical Journal. Britisth Medical Association vol. 331 pp. 331-4.
  21. Höfferer, P. 2007 Achieving business process interoperability using metamodels and ontologies , in H. Sterle, J. Schelp, R. Winter, eds Proceedings of the 15th European conference on information systems (ECIS2007) pp 1620- 31 Univerity of St. Gallen, Switzerland
  22. Hughes R. T., Al-Shehab A., and Winstanley G. 2006.Obstacles to the modelling of the causes of project success and failure systems. European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management. Trinity College, Dublin: MCIL,
  23. Hughes, R.T. 2010. Project management process ontologies: a proof of concept. Proceedings of the 15th annual conference of the UK Academy of Information Systems, Oriel College, Oxford 23-24 March
  24. Karlsson F. and Ågerfalk P. 2009 Exploring agile values in method configuration . European Journal of Information Systems. vol. 18, Palgrave Macmillan,.pp. 300-316
  25. Kim J. and Gil Y. 2001. Knowledge analysis on process models. Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence pp. 935-942.
  26. Marshall N. 2009. Cognitive and practice-based theories of organisational knowledge and learning: incompatible or complementary? Management Learning. Sage Publications. vol. 39. no. 4. pp. 413-435.
  27. Montibeller G., Belton V., Ackermann F., and. Ensslin L. 2007. Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation Journal of the Operational Research Society. vol. 59, pp. 575-89.
  28. Pearl, J. 2000 Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  29. Schwaber K. 2007 The Enterprise and Scrum. Redmond,
  30. Stach W. and Kurgan L. 2004.Modelling software development projects using fuzzy cognitive maps. Proceedings of 4th ASERC Workshop on quantitative and software engineering Banff AB
  31. Winter M., Smith C., Morris P., and Cicmil S. 2006. Directions for future research in project management: the main findings of a UK government-funded research network, International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier, vol. 24 pp. 638-649.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

T. Hughes R., Winstanley G. and Cox K. (2010). ONTOLOGICAL MODELLING TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING OF IS DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES - A Position Paper . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2010) ISBN 978-989-8425-29-4, pages 319-324. DOI: 10.5220/0003118003190324


in Bibtex Style

@conference{keod10,
author={Robert T. Hughes and Graham Winstanley and Karl Cox},
title={ONTOLOGICAL MODELLING TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING OF IS DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES - A Position Paper},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2010)},
year={2010},
pages={319-324},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0003118003190324},
isbn={978-989-8425-29-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2010)
TI - ONTOLOGICAL MODELLING TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING OF IS DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES - A Position Paper
SN - 978-989-8425-29-4
AU - T. Hughes R.
AU - Winstanley G.
AU - Cox K.
PY - 2010
SP - 319
EP - 324
DO - 10.5220/0003118003190324