优先考虑架构问题

L. Pareto, A. Sandberg, Peter S. Eriksson, Staffan Ehnebom
{"title":"优先考虑架构问题","authors":"L. Pareto, A. Sandberg, Peter S. Eriksson, Staffan Ehnebom","doi":"10.1109/WICSA.2011.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Efficient architecture work involves balancing the degree of architectural documentation with attention to needs, costs, agility and other factors. This paper presents a method for prioritizing architectural concerns in the presence of heterogeneous stakeholder groups in large organizations that need to evolve existing architecture. The method involves enquiry, analysis, and deliberation using collaborative and analytical techniques. Method outcomes are action principles directed to managers and improvement advice directed to architects along with evidence for recommendations made. The method results from 3 years of action research at Ericsson AB with the purpose of adding missing views to architectural documentation and removing superfluous ones. It is illustrated on a case where 29 senior engineers and managers within Ericsson prioritized 37 architectural concerns areas to arrive at 8 action principles, 5 prioritized improvement areas, and 24 improvement suggestions. Feedback from the organization is that the method has been effective in prioritizing architectural concerns, that data collection and analysis is more extensive compared to traditional prioritization practices, but that extensive analysis seems inevitable in architecture improvement work.","PeriodicalId":234615,"journal":{"name":"2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prioritizing Architectural Concerns\",\"authors\":\"L. Pareto, A. Sandberg, Peter S. Eriksson, Staffan Ehnebom\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/WICSA.2011.13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Efficient architecture work involves balancing the degree of architectural documentation with attention to needs, costs, agility and other factors. This paper presents a method for prioritizing architectural concerns in the presence of heterogeneous stakeholder groups in large organizations that need to evolve existing architecture. The method involves enquiry, analysis, and deliberation using collaborative and analytical techniques. Method outcomes are action principles directed to managers and improvement advice directed to architects along with evidence for recommendations made. The method results from 3 years of action research at Ericsson AB with the purpose of adding missing views to architectural documentation and removing superfluous ones. It is illustrated on a case where 29 senior engineers and managers within Ericsson prioritized 37 architectural concerns areas to arrive at 8 action principles, 5 prioritized improvement areas, and 24 improvement suggestions. Feedback from the organization is that the method has been effective in prioritizing architectural concerns, that data collection and analysis is more extensive compared to traditional prioritization practices, but that extensive analysis seems inevitable in architecture improvement work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":234615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/WICSA.2011.13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/WICSA.2011.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

高效的体系结构工作包括平衡体系结构文档的程度以及对需求、成本、敏捷性和其他因素的关注。本文提出了一种方法,用于在需要发展现有体系结构的大型组织中存在异构涉众组的情况下对体系结构关注点进行优先级排序。该方法包括使用协作和分析技术进行调查、分析和审议。方法结果是指导经理的行动原则和指导架构师的改进建议,以及提出建议的证据。该方法源于爱立信公司3年的行动研究,目的是在架构文档中添加缺少的视图并删除多余的视图。在一个案例中,爱立信的29名高级工程师和管理人员对37个架构关注领域进行了优先级排序,得出了8个行动原则、5个优先级改进领域和24个改进建议。来自组织的反馈是,该方法在确定体系结构关注的优先级方面是有效的,与传统的优先级划分实践相比,数据收集和分析更加广泛,但是在体系结构改进工作中,广泛的分析似乎是不可避免的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prioritizing Architectural Concerns
Efficient architecture work involves balancing the degree of architectural documentation with attention to needs, costs, agility and other factors. This paper presents a method for prioritizing architectural concerns in the presence of heterogeneous stakeholder groups in large organizations that need to evolve existing architecture. The method involves enquiry, analysis, and deliberation using collaborative and analytical techniques. Method outcomes are action principles directed to managers and improvement advice directed to architects along with evidence for recommendations made. The method results from 3 years of action research at Ericsson AB with the purpose of adding missing views to architectural documentation and removing superfluous ones. It is illustrated on a case where 29 senior engineers and managers within Ericsson prioritized 37 architectural concerns areas to arrive at 8 action principles, 5 prioritized improvement areas, and 24 improvement suggestions. Feedback from the organization is that the method has been effective in prioritizing architectural concerns, that data collection and analysis is more extensive compared to traditional prioritization practices, but that extensive analysis seems inevitable in architecture improvement work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信