BKCASE Workshop V

Hilton Garden InnPhoenix, Arizona

January 26-28, 2011

2

Some Thoughts from Reviewers• “As a non-SE, this material contributed to my understanding

and knowledge. Coming from an ILS background . . . it was worth my time to read the chapters and it will be an excellent reference source.”

• “It is obvious that much thought and effort has gone into producing this first draft of the SEBoK document.”

• “KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. Very encouraging piece of work. I can not imagine how difficult it is trying to get to "one voice”.”

• “This is a huge and tremendous work accomplished in a very short time. I would like to thank the authors and show them my admiration. Good luck for the next steps!”

• “An excellent first draft - I look forward to seeing the next version.”

As a Reminder…

3

What is BKCASE?

• Project to create:

– Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge

– Graduate Reference Curriculum in Systems Engineering (GRCSETM – pronounced “Gracie”)

• Started in September 2009 by Stevens Institute of Technology and Naval Postgraduate School with primary support from Department of Defense

• Project will run through 2012

• Intended for world-wide use

4

What is the SEBoK?

5

Describes the boundaries, terminology, content, and structure of SE that are needed to systematically and consistently support:

Guide to the literature, not all the content of the literature

What is in GRCSE?

• Guidance for Constructing and Maintaining the Reference Curriculum: the fundamental principles, assumptions, and context for the reference curriculum authors

• Entrance Expectations: what students should be capable of and have experienced before they enter a graduate program

• Outcomes: what students should achieve by graduation

• Architecture: the structure of a curriculum to accommodate core material, university-specific material, and elective material

• Core Body of Knowledge: material that all students should master in a graduate SE program

6

Not specific courses. Not specific packaging. Adaption and selective adoption expected and encouraged.

BKCASE Vision and Objectives

“Systems Engineering competency models, certification programs, textbooks, graduate programs, and related workforce

development initiatives around the world align with BKCASE.”Vision

1. Create the SEBoK and have it be globally recognized by the SE community as the authoritative guide to the body of knowledge for the SE discipline.

2. Create GRCSE and have it be globally recognized by the SE community as the authoritative guidance for graduate programs in SE.

3. Facilitate the global alignment of related workforce development initiatives with SEBoK and GRCSE.

4. Transfer stewardship of SEBoK and GRCSE to INCOSE and the IEEE after BKCASE publishes version 1.0 of those products, including possible integration into their certification, accreditation, and other workforce development and education initiatives.

Objectives

7

Our Partners

8

Under consideration

Under consideration

Remain as Observers

Rules for BKCASE Activities1. Products generated by the authors, not the sponsor or

partners

2. Even though the Department of Defense is the sponsor, it does not have any authority over the content of the products, nor are the products slanted towards defense systems development and acquisition

3. Volunteer authors do the bulk of the writing

4. Core Team from Stevens and Naval Postgraduate School provides stable labor and direction

5. Core Team responsible for final integration, technical editing, and clean up of products

9

And Now for Today’s Workshop…

10

11

Workshop Rules

1. First two days are in plenary session

2. Everyone has a voice

3. Record decisions and major points in real-time on slides that all can see

4. Strive for consensus on all substantive matters

5. Expect courtesy and professional behavior at all times

6. Record extensive minutes and publish them after each workshop

12

Workshop Objectives1. Review and resolve major/global SEBoK 0.25 review comments

and issues

2. Complete a draft development plan for SEBoK 0.5

3. Review wiki business cases and determine forward strategy for wiki development of BKCASE 0.5

4. Review GRCSE 0.25 release process and resolve residual issues

5. Determine BKCASE staffing for SEBoK, GRCSE, wiki, and Case Studies

6. Review specific BKCASE outreach opportunities (conferences, articles, …) and obtain author volunteers for development of papers and presentations

7. Review status of coordination efforts with IEEE and INCOSE

13

Wednesday’s AgendaTime Topic

8:00a Opening remarks, agenda review, new author and guest introductions – Art Pyster

8:30a SEBoK Review Discussion – Art Pyster10:00a Break

10:20a SEBoK Review Discussion (continued) – Art PysterSEBoK 0.25 Review Adjudication Strategy – Nicole Hutchison

12:00p Lunch

1:00p Wiki Business Cases and Selection of Business Model for Wiki Development – Nicole Hutchison

3:00p Break3:20p Case Study Update – Alice Squires5:00p Adjourn for the Day6:00p Group Dinner at Monti’s La Casa Vieja

14

Thursday’s AgendaTime Topic

8:00a Review of Day 1 – Dave Olwell9:00a GRCSE 0.25 Release Highlights – Tim Ferris

10:00a Break10:20a GRCSE 0.25 Release Details – Tim Ferris11:30p Lunch12:30p GRCSE 0.25 Release Details (continued) – Tim Ferris1:30p ASEE Paper – Dave Olwell2:00p Break2:20p Way Ahead for GRCSE Between Workshops V and VI – Tim Ferris3:00p BKCASE Staffing Plan for 2011 – Dave Olwell4:30p BKCASE Outreach Opportunities – Alice Squires4:45p Workshop VI Discussion – Art Pyster5:00p Adjourn

15

Friday’s Tentative Agenda

Time Topic

9:00a Review of Plans for Working Session – Art Pyster9:30a Working Sessions – Groups TBD

12:00p Lunch Served in Plenary Room1:00p Working Sessions (continued)3:00p Final Plenary Session and Workshop Wrap-Up – Dave Olwell3:30p Adjourn

Time Topic

8:00a Planning for The Day – Art Pyster

PART LEADS/CORE TEAM

ALL AUTHORS

SEBoK Review

Art Pyster

16

Overall SEBoK Status

• More than 3000 comments from more than 100 reviewers. Wow! Many more than we had expected. Terrific response from the community.

• Many really excellent thoughtful comments

• All comments captured in an adjudication matrix – Nicole will go over this later today

• Core Team spent two days last week understanding the major points raised by the reviewers and preparing recommendations for your consideration today

17

18

Top 10 Issues1. SEBoK Structure/Organization isn’t clean; too many independent chapters,

no cross-linkages, no graphical “map” to help people navigate2. Too much detail for many of the topics – should have less discourse and

more references3. Doesn’t always strike the right balance between prescriptive and

descriptive material4. Chapters 1 to 3 need to be more aligned and consistent5. Chapters 6 and 7 need to be more aligned and consistent6. Chapters 9 to 12 need to be more aligned and consistent7. References are erratic: 2-level system confusing; some stated that there

were too many references to be useful; too much BKCASE author work8. Methodology for selecting what is in the glossary was unclear and many

people were surprised at what was left out9. No clear rationale for deciding what should be in Chapter 14 (Cross-

Cutting); the term “cross-cutting” was confusing to many10. Many style inconsistencies and need for stronger technical editing

• Many reviewers said the long linear sequence of chapters wasn’t easy to follow. Too many components without a logical structure.

• One reviewer suggested grouping chapters into “Parts” or “Sections” to provide that structure and aid comprehension. The Core Team agrees and recommends:

Part 1: Beginnings

Part 2: System Taxonomy

Part 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle

Part 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations

Part 5: Domain Specific Examples

Issue #1: Restructuring

19

Part 1: Beginnings• Introduction, System Concepts and Thinking, General Overview of SE

and its ValuePart 2: System Taxonomy

• Product Systems (new), Service Systems, Enterprise SystemsPart 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle

• Life Cycles, System Definition, System Realization, System Deployment and Use, Life Management, Cross-Cutting

Part 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations• Enabling SE in the Organization, SE Management, Agreement,

Competency, SE in the Global Context/Across Cultures (new)Part 5: Domain Specific Examples

• Case Studies in Different Domains and Applications

Issue #1: Parts and Chapters

20

1. Development of each Part led by an author + a Core Team member

2. Each chapter within a Part is led by an author3. Each chapter has additional authors who contribute writing4. Each Part lead author + Core Team member is responsible for

working with author teams to:• Shape author teams to contribute material• Adjudicate review comments – to include possible

restructuring of chapters within a part• Get the right depth, style, substance, length, consistency,

prescriptiveness vs. descriptiveness• Have the right references

Issues #1: Staffing Approach

Also addresses Issues 2-6 21

Part 1: Beginnings – Barry Boehm and Art Pyster

Part 2: System Taxonomy – Rick Adcock and Nicole Hutchison

Part 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle – Bud Lawson and Dave Olwell

Part 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations – Garry Roedler and Alice Squires

Part 5: Domain Specific Examples – Heidi Davidz and Alice Squires

Issue #1: Proposed Part Lead Authorsand Core Team Members

Chapter leader and chapter author assignments still to be decided – people can stay with assignments from 0.25 or move elsewhere

22

Issue #7: References1. Confusion about the categories for references - need new approach to

focus on recommended readings and citations2. For each topic within chapter:

– Works cited but not recommended; perhaps historical document – Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand topic

3. For each chapter within Part:– Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand chapter

4. For Part:– Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand Part

5. For SEBoK– Top 10 recommended readings for all of SE

6. All recommended readings must be annotated– 1-2 short paragraphs explaining the primary benefits– Guidance to novices about what’s important in the field and how to

navigate with additional insights for people with more experience

23

Issue #7: Recommended ReadingsAlignment

Recommended readings will be analyzed with respect to alignment with SEBoK topics

– help identify where additional readings are needed (e.g. Part 2, Chapter 1, Topic 1 below)

– help identify where a recommended reading may not be appropriate for inclusion at a higher level (e.g., Recommended Reading 1 may not be appropriate for inclusion in the Top 10 readings for a chapter even though it is recommended for Part 1, Chapter 1, Topic 1 below)

SEBoK Area RR 1 RR 2 RR 3 RR 4 RR 5 RR 6 . . .

P1/C1/T1 X X X X

P1/C1/T2 X

P1/C2/T1 X X X

P1/C2/T2 X X X

P2/C1/T1

P2/C1/T2 X X

. . .

24

Issue #8: Glossary/Terminology1. Many reviewers said that even though it can be useful to have

multiple definitions, it can also be quite confusing2. General Recommendation: SEBoK should provide 1 definition

wherever possible3. Approach

– Identify “primary” terms which require consistent definition– Author team will strive for consensus on definitions for primary

terms (method TBD)– Primary terms to be highlighted in both text and glossary– Wherever possible, primary terms will include referenced

definitions– It is acceptable to explain the existence of additional definitions,

provided the key differences are explained and the references are appropriately cited.

25

Issue #9: Cross-Cutting1. Purpose of what was Chapter 14 in SEBoK 0.25 is to capture “specialty”

engineering that permeates across all other chapters

2. Often called “non-functional” topics, such as reliability, security, and safety

3. For SEBoK 0.5, will pick top TBD topics to include

4. For 0.5, will provide a template for all included topics to provide for common structure, style, content, and length

5. Will try to include only non-functional topics that are common across multiple domains

6. Other chapters should address non-functional topics lightly and point to cross-cutting chapter; conversely, cross-cutting chapter should point to other chapters

7. Well-suited for wiki structure

8. Name “cross-cutting” not well-accepted. Need another name

26