Jörg Holtmann, Jennifer Horkoff, Rebekka Wohlrab, Victoria Vu, Rashidah Kasauli, Salome Maro, Jan-Philipp Steghöfer, Eric Knauss
{"title":"Using boundary objects and methodological island (BOMI) modeling in large-scale agile systems development","authors":"Jörg Holtmann, Jennifer Horkoff, Rebekka Wohlrab, Victoria Vu, Rashidah Kasauli, Salome Maro, Jan-Philipp Steghöfer, Eric Knauss","doi":"10.1007/s10270-024-01193-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Large-scale systems development commonly faces the challenge of managing relevant knowledge between different organizational groups, particularly in increasingly agile contexts. Here, there is a conflict between coordination and group autonomy, and it is challenging to determine what necessary coordination information must be shared by what teams or groups, and what can be left to local team management. We introduce a way to manage this complexity using a modeling framework based on two core concepts: methodological islands (i.e., groups using different development methods than the surrounding organization) and boundary objects (i.e., artifacts that create a common understanding across team borders). However, we found that companies often lack a systematic way of assessing coordination issues and the use of boundary objects between methodological islands. As part of an iterative design science study, we have addressed this gap by producing a modeling framework (BOMI: Boundary Objects and Methodological Islands) to better capture and analyze coordination and knowledge management in practice. This framework includes a metamodel, as well as a list of bad smells over this metamodel that can be leveraged to detect inter-team coordination issues. The framework also includes a methodology to suggest concrete modeling steps and broader guidelines to help apply the approach successfully in practice. We have developed Eclipse-based tool support for the BOMI method, allowing for both graphical and textual model creation, and including an implementation of views over BOMI instance models in order to manage model complexity. We have evaluated these artifacts iteratively together with five large-scale companies developing complex systems. In this work, we describe the BOMI framework and its iterative evaluation in several real cases, reporting on lessons learned and identifying future work. We have produced a matured and stable modeling framework which facilitates understanding and reflection over complex organizational configurations, communication, governance, and coordination of knowledge artifacts in large-scale agile system development.</p>","PeriodicalId":49507,"journal":{"name":"Software and Systems Modeling","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Software and Systems Modeling","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-024-01193-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Large-scale systems development commonly faces the challenge of managing relevant knowledge between different organizational groups, particularly in increasingly agile contexts. Here, there is a conflict between coordination and group autonomy, and it is challenging to determine what necessary coordination information must be shared by what teams or groups, and what can be left to local team management. We introduce a way to manage this complexity using a modeling framework based on two core concepts: methodological islands (i.e., groups using different development methods than the surrounding organization) and boundary objects (i.e., artifacts that create a common understanding across team borders). However, we found that companies often lack a systematic way of assessing coordination issues and the use of boundary objects between methodological islands. As part of an iterative design science study, we have addressed this gap by producing a modeling framework (BOMI: Boundary Objects and Methodological Islands) to better capture and analyze coordination and knowledge management in practice. This framework includes a metamodel, as well as a list of bad smells over this metamodel that can be leveraged to detect inter-team coordination issues. The framework also includes a methodology to suggest concrete modeling steps and broader guidelines to help apply the approach successfully in practice. We have developed Eclipse-based tool support for the BOMI method, allowing for both graphical and textual model creation, and including an implementation of views over BOMI instance models in order to manage model complexity. We have evaluated these artifacts iteratively together with five large-scale companies developing complex systems. In this work, we describe the BOMI framework and its iterative evaluation in several real cases, reporting on lessons learned and identifying future work. We have produced a matured and stable modeling framework which facilitates understanding and reflection over complex organizational configurations, communication, governance, and coordination of knowledge artifacts in large-scale agile system development.
期刊介绍:
We invite authors to submit papers that discuss and analyze research challenges and experiences pertaining to software and system modeling languages, techniques, tools, practices and other facets. The following are some of the topic areas that are of special interest, but the journal publishes on a wide range of software and systems modeling concerns:
Domain-specific models and modeling standards;
Model-based testing techniques;
Model-based simulation techniques;
Formal syntax and semantics of modeling languages such as the UML;
Rigorous model-based analysis;
Model composition, refinement and transformation;
Software Language Engineering;
Modeling Languages in Science and Engineering;
Language Adaptation and Composition;
Metamodeling techniques;
Measuring quality of models and languages;
Ontological approaches to model engineering;
Generating test and code artifacts from models;
Model synthesis;
Methodology;
Model development tool environments;
Modeling Cyberphysical Systems;
Data intensive modeling;
Derivation of explicit models from data;
Case studies and experience reports with significant modeling lessons learned;
Comparative analyses of modeling languages and techniques;
Scientific assessment of modeling practices