3.4.3 The Value‐Based Theory of Systems Engineering: Identifying and Explaining Dependencies

Boehm, Barry; Jain, Astha

doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2007.tb02895.x

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The win conditions, issues, and options are captured on the wall that all stakeholders can view, access, and modify concurrently. Winbook offers a color coded view of the notion of WinWin Equilibrium [8] which helps see the agreement status at a glance. Winbook also allows the participants to prioritize their win conditions and identify the minimum marketable features.…”

Section: System Thinking Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

System Thinking: Educating T-Shaped Software Engineers

Boehm

Mobasser

2015

2015 IEEE 28th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With respect to system thinking, a T-shaped person is one who has technical depth in at least one aspect of the system's content, and a workable level of understanding of a fair number of the other system aspects.Many pure computer science graduates are strongly I-shaped, with a great deal of depth in software technology, but little understanding of the other disciplines involved in such areas as business, medicine, transportation, or Internets of Things. This leaves them poorly prepared to participate in the increasing numbers of projects involving multi-discipline system thinking, and in strong need of software skills.We have developed and evolved an MS-level software engineering curriculum that enables Computer Science (CS) majors to become considerably more T-shaped than when they entered. It includes courses in software management and economics, human-computer interaction, embedded software systems, systems and software requirements, architecture, and Verification and Validation (V&V), and a two-semester, realclient team project course that gives students experience in applying these skills. We find via feedback on the students' internships and job experiences that they and their employers have high rates of success in job offers and job performance. Index Terms-SoftwareEngineering, Systems Engineering, System Thinking, T-shaped, Curriculum, Education and Training, The Incremental Commitment Spiral Model 2015 IEEE 28th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training 978-1-4673-6701-1/15 $31.00

show abstract

Section: System Thinking Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

System Thinking: Educating T-Shaped Software Engineers

Boehm

Mobasser

2015

2015 IEEE 28th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous work. The value-based approach has already been thoroughly analyzed in a number of works which heavily influenced the realization of our quantitative model and its theoretical background ) (Falessi, Cantone and Krutchen 2008) (Boehm and Apurva 2007) (Biffl et al 2006) (Boehm 2005) (Boehm 2003) (Boehm 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3.2.2 Enhancing the System Development Process Performance: a Value‐Based Approach

Mastrofini

Cantone

Seaman

et al. 2012

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When planning or controlling the system development process, a project leader needs to make decisions which take into account a number of aspects, including: availability of assets and competences, previously enacted processes in the organization, certifications the system is required to obtain, standards to comply with, interactions among process activities, contextual factors and constraints, and allocated budget and schedule. In this paper we propose a value‐based approach for supporting decision making. The aim is to provide supportive information for decisions related to the system verification process. This would in turn enhance the performance of system development process by supporting the decision making process for complex systems. We report both academic and industrial empirical evaluations, which demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of our proposal, and thus prompt us to refine and extend our approach to sub‐processes other than verification.

show abstract