BKCASE Workshop VCase Studies

January 26–28, 2011 Team: Aaron Eng Seng Chia, Heidi Davidz, Richard Freeman,

Sandy Friedenthal, Tom Hilburn, Alex Lee, Alice SquiresPhoenix, AZ

Case Study Companion Document: Schedule and Forward Plan Update

Jan 25-28, 2011

Initial Companion Guide• Developed for the most part early this month

building on Chapter 16 material and adding HST.• Primarily mapped existing case studies to the

SEBoK Knowledge Areas (KAs) in more detail– Strong: thoroughly addresses all of the elements of

the case study topic area– Moderate: most of the elements addressed, but some

are missing or have limited coverage– Weak: many of the elements not addressed or have

limited coverage– None: topic area not addressed in case study

Jan 25-28, 2011

Ex/ Hubble Space Telescope

• Strong Relationship– SE Life Cycle– Life Cycle Model Mgmt– SEM Planning– Risk Management– Stakeholder Reqs– Integration

• Moderate Relationship– Value of SE– Principles of SE– Architectural Design– Operation

Jan 25-28, 2011

Companion Guide• Introduction• Chapter 1: Purpose; Summary of systems engineering case

study development efforts completed and underway• Chapter 2: Case study outline and a table summarizing the

case studies according to Ch. 16 template• Chapter 3: Hubble Space Telescope (HST) case study

published by the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)• Chapter 4: Global Positioning System (GPS) case study also

published by AFIT• Chapter 5: A large-scale systems engineering perspective of

water management in Singapore case study and addresses the Singapore Water Management System (SWMS)

• Chapter 6: Summary (Final Thoughts or Road Ahead)• Glossary• ReferencesJan 25-28, 2011

Case Study Outline• An overview, including a short description, the application domain

and application area (enterprise, service, or product), as defined in Chapter 16.

• An identification of the primary domain(s) of the case study. • An description of the case study development including the

methods used; the timeframe from initial data collection to final publication of the case study; and specific direction or policy that drove the methods used.

• The results from the case study criteria analysis that determines whether or not the case study will be accepted into the Companion guide as defined in Chapter 16.

• A mapping to SEBoK for every section as defined in Chapter 16. All sections are included for ease of locating a particular area by heading number. This is the same convention used in the Program Management Body of Knowledge extensions. This mapping can be accomplished in more than one way (see next slide).

• A summary and conclusion. This section summarizes the findings from the case study and the rationale for the findings. It also summarize the scope of applicability of these findings.

Jan 25-28, 2011s

Three Approaches• External Case Study (AFIT, NASA, Etc…)

– No modification to external case studies.– Purposes achieved through detailed write-up in

Companion Guide

• Modifiable Case Study (One that’s in process)– Can add annotations to case study as needed

• Terminology matching• Additional explanations, linking, references, etc…

• New Case Study (Drive New Efforts)– Developed with SEBoK as guidance

Jan 25-28, 2011

Companion Guide Purpose1. To elaborate the principles, practices, and concepts from the

SEBoK by adding domain dependent detail2. To demonstrate how the principles, practices, and concepts from

the SEBoK are applied and tailored (including terminology and rationale) to different: Application domains; Countries, regions, and cultures; Project characteristics (e.g. size & complexity)

3. To provide a means to evaluate the application of practices from the SEBoK including highlighting what works and what does not work

4. To provide a means to evaluate new and evolving principles, practices, and concepts (e.g. SoS, model-based, complex adaptive systems, etc.)

5. To motivate the use of SE principles, practices, and concepts to new users

6. To provide a teaching and training aid to new and experienced practitioners based on the above – ex/ in their domain

Jan 25-28, 2011

SEBoK Ch. 16 Feedback

Explanation/Actions Total Delete Case Study Chapter 9 21% Keep case studies 16 38% New Case Study Suggestion/Reference 8 19% Specific Action Suggested 4 10% General Comment - No action 5 12% Grand Total 42 100%

Jan 25-28, 2011

•Delete: Replace case studies with Technical Performance Measures (1)

•Keep: Integrate case studies throughout SEBoK (4)

•Keep: Add examples of failures (3) Note: HST not in Chapter 16

•Keep: Put entire chapter in separate book (1)

Are case studies the way to go?• Unanimous: Yes (7) (biased sample )• The case study is a valuable tool for understanding how to apply SE• SE, unlike other technical disciplines is best observed through actions that,

when combined, are intended to yield a desired outcome• Encourages active participation and gives students a better sense of when

and how to use knowledge; provides context; captures domain specific• Show how SE concepts and practices were used (or misused or not used)

in various domains - surely a valuable instructional resource• But as teaching and training aids and to motivate the use of SE, not as

proof and not to generalize from• We have used case studies extensive and successfully for more than 30

years to impart to each successive generation of SE across a very diverse domain; but not the only didactic approach

• But requires experts in domain to properly relate to context of SEBoK

Jan 25-28, 2011

BKCASE Technical Objective #6

Jan 25-28, 2011

For Consideration/Discussion

• Drop effort and include vignettes instead• Continue on current course• Incorporate Case Study Companion Guide into

SEBoK Version 0.5 – schedule/logistically– As an appendix– As part of Chapter 16– Integrated across chapters by KA

Jan 25-28, 2011