Exploring the current state of the art in formal systems architecture development and production by requesting information about the current practices associated with design structure matrices.
I for myself know DSM from software architecture conformance/consistency research where they are considered a basic but easy-to-lern technique for dependency analysis. However, other approaches like reflexion modelling seem to be more flexible and draw more attention in that research area. See also "Static Architecture-Conformance Checking: An Illustrative Overview" by Passos et al for a comparison.
yes, I think it's mainly used for static analysis. But maybe you want to try the Lattix tool to see what is possible with DSM for architecture analysis (lattix.com).
Mary Parker Follett (1898-1933), social worker and management consultant, was ahead of her time when she proposed the management principle of doing away with hierarchies and replacing them by giving the individuals in the organization the Situation Visibility they need to manage their own work. Now with networked desktop computers and the Design Structure Matrix (DSM), we have a modern way of implementing her vision to produce a largely self-managing organization.
The Design Structure Matrix shows for each task that needs an item of information what tasks need to be performed to provide that information. The DSM for the project is displayed along with the status of completion of each item of information on the screens of the computers of all those involved in the team. The display thus shows everyone who they depend on and who depends on them for information.
The DSM shows where there are circuits in the predecessors, e.g. task A needs information from task B, task B needs information from task C, and task C needs information from task A. This is a common occurrence. Circuits are broken by using assumptions. The DSM helps decide on what assumptions to use to start the process.
After doing the work based on these assumptions and coming back to the assumptions, one can see whether the result of making the assumptions confirm whether the assumptions were valid. If not, the assumptions are improved and another iteration is made.
The display also shows during the process the status of each item of information, whether it has or has not yet been determined. And it shows which assumptions have yet to be resolved and which are still open. The assumptions that are still open is a measure of the remaining risk.
The name of the game is to close assumptions as quickly as possible to reduce the remaining risks. This avoids getting to what one thinks is the end of the project only to realize that there lingers an overlooked open assumption and resolving it will delay the project and increase the cost. Keeping constant track of the assumptions still open can save a great deal of money and embarrassment.
Each member of the self-managing team can see the state of everyone else’s work. It becomes clear when someone needs some help so that others can provide it. Everyone knows the states of the work he is waiting on so he can plan accordingly.
When some change needs to be made, the DSM reflects that change and everyone sees how his work is affected. The new state of the project is then brought up-to-date.
Much of this coordination had been done by management. But often the communications between management and the team introduces misunderstandings and delays. This can be avoided by those in the autonomous team doing the coordination by themselves.
The role of management is then to be the interface with the customers, to provide resources and help as needed, and not to amplify the pressure on a team that is already aware of the pressure. Otherwise, management should just observe and stay out of the way. And above all, management shouldn’t be a naysayer to every creative suggestion and thus kill innovation.
Also this Donald V Steward character has now come up with another crazy idea, the Explainer. The Explainer can be used to solve complex problems that are beyond the capabilities of unaided people to solve. It puts together logically more cause-and-effects to determine their implications than we can. He has used it to propose solutions to many of the problems that have Congress in gridlock.
Now we need people to look below the surface to see how it works and use it to solve some of the problems that are causing us so much trouble today. But people's first reaction is to think it is absurd and not worth their effort to look below the surface.
If you are interested in looking in this further, email me at [email protected].
It would appear to me that others may also have thought about using DSM for forming an autonomous organization. I would like to hear from anyone who may have implemented this concept and learn of their experience. Has anyone published anything on it?
And I would like to know of anyone who may be interested in the Explainer.I have used the Explainer to show how Congress can solve some of the problems that cause them to be in gridlock. But I have not seen any evidence that these problems are being solved. If anyone else has come up with such a method, I would like to hear about it. Maybe someone has come up with such a method and they have also had trouble getting people to look below the surface to see how it works and can be used.