=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=None
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-800/paper-2-2.pdf
|volume=Vol-800
}}
==None==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-800/paper-2-2.pdf
Agile Service Development:
A Rule-Based Method Engineering Approach1
Stijn Hoppenbrouwers1 Martijn Zoet2,
Johan Versendaal2,3, Inge van de Weerd3,
1
Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands, {s.hoppenbrouwers@cs.ru.nl}
2
University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht, the Netherlands,
{martijn.zoet, johan.versendaal}@hu.nl
3
Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands,
{j.versendaal, i.vandeweerd, }@cs.uu.nl
Businesses may apply concepts of agility as a strategy to take up challenges in the
rapidly changing business environment. Agility is defined as “the ability of a sensitive
[organization] that exhibits flexibility to accommodate expected or unexpected
changes rapidly, following the shortest time span, using economical, simple and
quality instruments in a dynamic environment and applying updated prior knowledge
and experience to learn from the internal and external environment” (Qumer en
Henderson, 2007). This definition positioned in the context of agile service
development asserts that an organization should be able to create or adapt a (business)
service efficiently and effectively when changes occur in its environment.
Agile development is not an alien concept in management and information systems
research. It plays some role in existing work on situational method engineering in
software product development literature (Olle et al, 1991; Kumar and Welke, 1992;
Brinkkemper, 1996; Van de Weerd et al., 2006). Based on situational factors distilled
from the project, meta-methods composed of outlines or more detailed procedures are
selected and integrated into a coherent method appropriate for that specific situation
(Brinkkemper, 1996). However, ‘situational’ is not synonymous to ‘agile’. For a
method to become truly agile, changing situational factors also have to be linked (if
required) to ‘run time’ changes in the method: quick responses to new situational
information, and the installation of short feedback loops applying to the method.
Utilizing the perspective of situationality, method fragments can be used to provide
some degree of agility with respect to the project at hand. Regarding the assembly of
method fragments, our approach follows the configuration process for situational
method engineering as proposed by Brinkkemper (1996). However, our approach
adds a second dimension of agility in operational execution. Changes in the
environment will not always lead to changes in the executed method but can still
influence the operational execution of a specific method fragment.
To realize this, we propose a particular operationalization of the method
engineering approach and process in terms of the selection process of method
1 Previously published as: S. Hoppenbrouwers, M. Zoet, J. Versendaal, I. van de Weerd: Agile Service
Development –A Rule-Based Method Engineering Approach. In: J. Ralyté, I. Mirbel and R. Deneckère
(eds.): Engineering Methods in the Service-Oriented Context; 4th IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference on
Method Engineering, ME 2011, Paris, France, April 20-22, 2011. Proceedings. IFIP Advances in
Information and Communication Technology, Volume 351/2011 pp184-189, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-
19997-4_17
41
fragments, situational factors and assembly rules. The idea is that participants are
given as much freedom as possible within necessary methodical and contextual
constraints (minimal specification), and that the ability to respond quickly to desired
changes in the method (as indicated by fast feedback) is optimized: increased agility
in our approach is supported by defining method fragments in a rule-based,
declarative manner. This approach is inspired by principles and practices from
(business) rules management, organizational patterns and game design theory.
Fig. 1. Method engineering approach for agile service development.
Without claiming that the approach put forward in this position paper will guarantee
agility of processes for service development, we believe the approach proposed will
allow for considerably better agility than existing practices in ME that are more
rooted in imperative style specification of methods and method fragments.
5 References
Brinkkemper, S. (1996). Method engineering: engineering of information systems development
methods and tools. Information and Software Technology, 38(4), pp 275-280.
Kumar, K and Welke, R.J. (1992). Methodology engineering: a proposal for situation-specific
methodology construction. In Cotterman, W.W., Senn J.A. (eds), Challenges and Strategies
for Research in Systems Development..
Olle, T.W., Hagelstein, J., MacDonald, I.G., Rolland, C., Sol, H.G., van Assche, F.J.M. and
Verrijn-Stuart, A.A. (1991). Information Systems Methodologies: a Framework for
Understanding (2nd edition). Addison-Wesley.
Qumer, A., Henderson-Sellers, B., (2007). An evaluation of the degree of agility in six agile
methods and its applicability for method engineering. Information and Software Technology,
50(4), pp 280-295.
Weerd, I. van de, Versendaal, J., & Brinkkemper, S. (2006). A product software knowledge
infrastructure for situational capability maturation: Vision and case studies in product
management. Proceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Requirements Engineering:
Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ'06), Luxembourg, pp 97-112.
42