6W Guide team telecon notes

Discussion about the development of the MBSE 6W Guide
julianfej
Workstream Lead
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 7:59 am
Contact:

6W Guide team telecon notes

Postby julianfej » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:53 pm

This thread will contain notes to team telecons.

julianfej
Workstream Lead
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 7:59 am
Contact:

Re: 6W Guide team telecon notes

Postby julianfej » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:55 pm

outcomes of group telecon, Monday 24/10/2016

For info, brief notes to above telecon meeting:

Attendees at the telecon:
Julian Johnson <julianfej@gmail.com>;
'ian. clark ' <ian.clark@mbda-systems.com>;
'Ali. Parandeh ' <Ali.Parandeh@atkinsglobal.com>;
james. towers <james.towers@scarecrowconsultants.co.uk>;

Agenda: see below

Outcomes:

JJ summarised the current status, with materials for emerging content on the wiki, and discussions and some source material, on Forum (addresses below).

JJ explained that the wiki content of the emerging Guide was now being treated as ‘master’, although as said previously he will attempt to ensure that no one is disadvantaged by this, offering to include new material if it was provided in alternative forms (e.g. MS Word).

IC raised an issue that (with MBSE) engineers can ‘do too much’, how could issues such as this be encompassed in the 6W framework?
JJ suggested that there had been placeholder sections FAQ, Case studies and Related Material add, and aspects like this could be handled with an appropriately phrased question and response.

In terms of status of the 6W ‘sections’, JJ noted that IC was recorded as providing a content for ‘Who?’ but he could not recall it; IP explained that he had indeed produced something, and would dig it out. He subsequently provided a link to the material and the file to which JJ had responded (2016 02 07 Draft Omega content Who v1 jj.docx).

Action 20161024.1 JJ will incorporate IP ‘Who?’ into the wiki content, in an appropriate way; some content is specific to the two existing stakeholders (Engineer, Engineering Manager), while other useful content explores significance of other stakeholders.

There was some discussion of the ’Where?’ contribution previous provided by JT and responded to by JJ.

Action 20161024.2 JT will revisit this ’Where?’ contribution material, in the light of some discussion that took place (where, when, and relationship of MBSE to CDSE - conventional document-based SE)

JT also noted that one of the motivations for shifting ‘master’ to wiki content, was to facilitate the visibility and exploitation of other potential ‘assets’ that had been produced by the subgroup in earlier discussions and which were not that visible in the Forum threads.

Action 20161024.3 JT offered to pull together some concise summary of subgroup ‘assets’ / work items.

There was some discussion around evolution of the practical Guide, versus putting together a ‘proposal’ to Council. JT explained that this had been rather ‘self-generated’ (not actually required), and the challenge had been how could we explain what we envisaged the content to be, without going some way down the route to elaborate it: we’d know it when we see it.

JJ explored what would be potentially achieved ahead of ASEC2016, Could some level of maturity be achieved such that some representative pages could be shown in the MBSE WG session. JT noted that this was an opportunity to give visibility to progress, and raise level of interest and possible involvement.

In terms of remaining 6W areas, the ‘How do I make use of MBSE?’ remained an un-adopted question (since Goncalos left the subgroup). AP agreed to make at draft few sentences for at least one of the primary stakeholders.

Action 20161024.4 IP offered to draft a few sentences for at least one of the primary stakeholders for the ‘How do I make use of MBSE?’ question, with rationale please.

JJ requested that where possible above actions could be complete by end of week, to keep some momentum going (for JT one of his actions).
In discussion about a next telecon meeting, no specific time was agreed, although the attendees did appear to agree that this mechanism did help to stimulate progress.

JJ thanked the attendees, and closed the meeting.

Summary of actions:
Action 20161024.1 JJ will incorporate IP ‘Who?’ into the wiki content, in an appropriate way; some content is specific to the two existing stakeholders (Engineer, Engineering Manager), while other useful content explores significance of other stakeholders.
Action 20161024.2 JT will revisit this ’Where?’ contribution material, in the light of some discussion that took place (where, when, and relationship of MBSE to CDSE - conventional document-based SE)
Action 20161024.3 JT offered to pull together some concise summary of subgroup ‘assets’ / work items.
Action 20161024.4 IP offered to draft a few sentences for at least one of the primary stakeholders for the ‘How do I make use of MBSE?’ question, with rationale please.

Regards

Julian.

julianfej
Workstream Lead
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 7:59 am
Contact:

Re: 6W Guide team telecon notes

Postby julianfej » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:17 am

I believe I have closed action below with updates to the pages off:
http://www.incosewiki.info/Model_Based_Systems_Engineering/index.php?title=MBSE_Adoption_Guide

Action 20161024.1 JJ will incorporate IP ‘Who?’ into the wiki content, in an appropriate way; some content is specific to the two existing stakeholders (Engineer, Engineering Manager), while other useful content explores significance of other stakeholders.


Return to “6W Guide”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron