IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v8y2005i2p151-163.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A model for the evolution of software and systems engineering project cultures throughout their life cycles

Author

Listed:
  • Atiogbe Didier Koffi

Abstract

Software development projects are renown for exhibiting chaotic outcomes despite the application of recent development process paradigms. This paper argues that the development culture followed by a software project greatly contributes at a deeper level to its ultimate outcome. Five such cultures are discussed: the calendar driven culture, the requirements driven culture, the documentation driven culture, the quality driven culture, and the architecture driven culture. Each culture is characterized by the priority of objectives that it selects and the artifacts that it predominantly generates. Cultural shifts throughout a project life cycle are also often identified as unconscious responses to pressure exercised by the project stakeholders. This article presents a conceptual model that captures the cultural profile of a software project and estimates the cost and/or difficulty of shifting from one culture to another. Changing cultures can have severe consequences on a project success. An improved knowledge of the nature and objectives of each culture combined with a keen awareness of the impact of shifting cultures can mitigate chaotic outcomes by enabling better decision‐making throughout a software project life cycle. The paper also attempts to establish the extent to which the results are also relevant to the Systems Engineering discipline. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 8: 151–163, 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Atiogbe Didier Koffi, 2005. "A model for the evolution of software and systems engineering project cultures throughout their life cycles," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 151-163.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:8:y:2005:i:2:p:151-163
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20026
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20026?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colin J. Neill & Jon D. Holt, 2002. "Adding temporal modeling to the UML to support systems design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 213-222.
    2. Ingmar Ögren, 2000. "Possible tailoring of the UML for systems engineering purposes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(4), pages 212-224.
    3. Lee W. Wagenhals & Sajjad Haider & Alexander H. Levis, 2003. "Synthesizing executable models of object oriented architectures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 266-300.
    4. Jesse Daniels & Terry Bahill, 2004. "The hybrid process that combines traditional requirements and use cases," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(4), pages 303-319.
    5. Terry Bahill & Jesse Daniels, 2003. "Using objected‐oriented and UML tools for hardware design: A case study," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 28-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francis Vanek & Peter Jackson & Richard Grzybowski, 2008. "Systems engineering metrics and applications in product development: A critical literature review and agenda for further research," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 107-124, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Terry Bahill & Jesse Daniels, 2003. "Using objected‐oriented and UML tools for hardware design: A case study," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 28-48.
    2. Madwaraj Rao & Sreeram Ramakrishnan & Cihan Dagli, 2008. "Modeling and simulation of net centric system of systems using systems modeling language and colored Petri‐nets: A demonstration using the global earth observation system of systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(3), pages 203-220, September.
    3. Shiva Abdoli & Sami Kara, 2017. "A Modelling Framework to Design Executable Logical Architecture of Engineering Systems," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(9), pages 1-75, September.
    4. Renzhong Wang & Cihan H. Dagli, 2011. "Executable system architecting using systems modeling language in conjunction with colored Petri nets in a model‐driven systems development process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 383-409, December.
    5. Lee W. Wagenhals & Alexander H. Levis, 2009. "Service Oriented Architectures, the DoD Architecture Framework 1.5, and Executable Architectures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 312-343, December.
    6. Eric D. Smith & Young Jun Son & Massimo Piattelli‐Palmarini & A. Terry Bahill, 2007. "Ameliorating mental mistakes in tradeoff studies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 222-240, September.
    7. Hermann Kaindl, 2005. "A scenario‐based approach for requirements engineering: Experience in a telecommunication software development project," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 197-210, September.
    8. Jesse Daniels & Terry Bahill, 2004. "The hybrid process that combines traditional requirements and use cases," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(4), pages 303-319.
    9. Jesko G. Lamm & Tim Weilkiens, 2014. "Method for Deriving Functional Architectures from Use Cases," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 225-236, June.
    10. Conrad Bock, 2003. "UML 2 activity model support for systems engineering functional flow diagrams," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 249-265.
    11. Jessica Ryan & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2014. "Leveraging Variability Modeling Techniques for Architecture Trade Studies and Analysis," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 10-25, March.
    12. Ashraf M. Abusharekh & Lawrence E. Gloss & Alexander H. Levis, 2011. "Evaluation of Service Oriented Architecture‐based federated architectures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 56-72, March.
    13. Eric D. Smith & A. Terry Bahill, 2010. "Attribute substitution in systems engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 130-148, June.
    14. Thomas Ford & David Meyer & John Colombi & Brian Scheller & Cody Palmer, 2018. "A method of assessing the time-variant value of multi-domain architectures," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 15(4), pages 471-481, October.
    15. Magnus Eriksson & Kjell Borg & Jürgen Börstler, 2008. "Use Cases for Systems Engineering—An Approach and Empirical Evaluation," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 39-60, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:8:y:2005:i:2:p:151-163. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.