As you may have noticed, inclusion of business vocabularies (also referred to as glossaries) into the project activities is trending, yet this process is often lacking objective feedback and consolidated opinion from the experts and industry. Do we really need specialized/additional solutions for that? If you are working in the field of business analysis, business modeling, requirements engineering, IS design or development, I would like to hear your opinion!
Or better yet, please consider filling out an anonymous five minute survey that is being conducted by the Center of Information Systems Design Technologies of Kaunas University of Technology and is available at
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1_0ny0cCRKRw0GxxqoAlZphUSHB93w86OYJBNw3DrkMI/viewform
On the last page of the survey, there is an option to leave extended feedback, if you wish to do so. Each answer is extremely valuable to us!
We would appreciate your response by March 24th. Feel free to also forward it to your fellow colleagues, both academicians and practitioners. And big thanks to all of those who have already contributed!
I must also add that this survey is part of research that we plan to publish in the form of a paper, if we get enough feedback (which is harder to achieve than we thought). So you will be the first to know when it happens!
It is important to have a glossary. However, in these days of agile, such artifacts are not valued by the client unfortunately.
The importance to have a glossary is related to the domain complexity and at what extent the team understand the application domain. For instance, consider a software system for manufacturing management. If the software team does not have previous experience with manufacturing issues, concepts, typical terms and daily problems, it is very important to have a glossary.
In terms of agile methods, even if the team does not maintain a "glossary" artifact formally speaking, it may be created and maintained informally by using a whiteboard or a wiki page, without specific tasks for creating and maintaining such artifact. Each team member may have access to update the glossary and is responsible for keeping it updated.
Thanks a lot for your feedback, it will most surely be taken into consideration!
Overall, it seems the hunt for opinions will continue as getting people to fill in a survey turned out to be a much more difficult task than estimated. Well, it appears research is no exception when it comes to areas of life where psychology (and marketing) skills can really make a difference ;)
Jose, yes, the short version of the results (8 pages long paper to be precise) has been presented at the IEEE conference called CIT 2014 a few weeks ago. I have an e. book of the proceedings. However, I'm afraid I can not share this paper (as usual), so we'll have to wait untill it becomes available on IEEE Xplore (no idea when, sorry).
On the other hand, it would be interesting to know if copy-pasting the conclusions to this chat would contradict the copyright agreement with IEEE. Any ideas? :)
Just a brief update: the paper has been made available on IEEE Xplore. Just search my last name, there won't be much to choose from. And if you can't access this database but still want to see the paper, let me know.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Graphs