Soft System Stakeholder Analysis Case - Nokia, Networks Markus Kelanti, Pasi Kuvaja University of Oulu Jari Lehto, Miikka Kemppinen Nokia, Networks

The big picture of this presentation Background Soft System Stakeholder Analysis in action Soft System Stakeholder Analysis Analysis results Summary Future topics Original publication: Soft System Stakeholder Analysis Methodology https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290920320_Soft_System_Stakeholder_Analysis_Methodology

Background

Background Goal: Analyse and identify how a KPI reporting system can be automatized and how the company benefits for doing it. Target system: KPI reporting system. 9 different stakeholders involved initially. Each stakeholder has a role in creation of the KPIs. Practical problem: How to model, visualise and analyse complex systems in Software Intensive Systems development?

Soft System Stakeholder Analysis in Action

Structuring the problem as a model Example: A reuse KPI that measures saved hours in re-use. Re-use (h) Comp value Input(s) Re-use (h) * Comp value Action(s) and function(s) Reuse Output(s)

Modelling language Actual technical language should be a language stakeholders are familiar with. Re-use (h) Comp value Re-use (h) * Comp value Or it can be developed “on the fly” using the previous definition. In this case, the actual language was modified UML flowchart. Reuse

Stakeholder’s understanding captured in to a model Reuse report Person x generates a report Soft system boundary Obtain from a report Re-use (h) Comp value Obtain from intranet Intranet report Soft system boundary Re-use (h) * Comp value One stakeholder viewpoint is fully modelled when all items either start or end with “soft system boundary”. Reuse

Identification of relevant stakeholders Reuse report Person x generates a report Soft system boundary ??? Obtain from a report Who creates information elements in the model? Re-use (h) Comp value Obtain from intranet Intranet report Soft system boundary ??? Re-use (h) * Comp value How information is created? Reuse

Systematic modelling of new viewpoints Reuse report Person x generates a report Query reuse data from database Database Obtain from a report Soft system boundary Re-use (h) Comp value Obtain from intranet Intranet report Soft system boundary ??? Re-use (h) * Comp value Reuse

“Final” soft system model Continue until the source data for the original problem is found Note: the stakeholder viewpoints are similar in this model.

Analyse the impact of the original need Source data for the KPI Proposal: Design a script to automate this section of the soft system. Functions and actions currently creating the KPI Output KPI

Model the impact to the soft system model Source data for the KPI New implementation The existing model can be re-used and updated. Output KPI

Analyse value of the impact for each stakeholder Value measure: working hour Script automates KPI calculation for one reuse -element Stakeholders affected by the implementation save working hours Additional benefit is an ability to run the script anytime

Implement if the value is desired That’s it?

Utilise existing model and extend it The original problem had more KPIs

And more…

Abstraction problem?

Stakeholder viewpoints are also abstractions Create reuse report Reuse report Person x generates a report Query reuse data from database Database Calculate Software Reuse Obtain from a report Soft system boundary Re-use (h) Comp value Obtain from intranet Intranet report Soft system boundary ??? Re-use (h) * Comp value Reuse

Analyse the impact of the original need, take two Database Database Soft system boundary Stakeholder 1 calculates Variable 2’ Stakeholder 1 calculates Variable 2 Stakeholder 1 provides Variable 2 Stakeholder 4 obtains Variable 3 Variable 1 Variable 2’ Variable 2 Variable 3 Variable 1 * variable 2 So that’s it then? KPI output We could just provide a local solution that automates each three variations separately. Impact would be similar as in the first example, although value isn’t similar due more resources spend on implementation.

Expansion to any information flow direction Impact of the stakeholder need tends to extend outside the original problem and its environment. And in this example, it extends outside the currently known system model.

From local to strategic level Extending the soft system model with additional viewpoints allows examining, analyzing and evaluating impact and value in strategic level.

Strategic level revealed new values What are the real needed KPIs? Are current KPIs able to measure the development process? Are the KPIs accurate? How to display KPI metrics to different stakeholders? KPI presentation? Is the KPI measuring the expected phenomena?

Results and Summary

KPI reporting system analysis results Local impact Calculation can be run automatically at any time Data available in a single location obtainable any time Potential strategic impact Accuracy of KPIs KPI restructuring Identification of KPIs organization needs KPI format, presentation and visualization Local value Working time savings measured in man months Saved working hour can be used for other tasks Potential strategic values KPIs measure real intended phenomenon KPI accuracy and validity affect decision-making Work time savings in whole organization

Benefits and feedback Systematic structuring of complex soft systems from multiple stakeholder viewpoints in to a single model. Expanding the local problem in to a strategic level to reveal impact and value invisible in local level. Visualization had a huge impact – faster situation awareness. Support and drive towards model-based development and analysis. Analysis and identification of unknown or invisible problems as the soft system model extends. Converging of stakeholder viewpoints due increased understanding and mutual understanding.

Benefits and feedback (cont.) Potential to approach any problem. Data and method structure increased method usability. Increased communication efficiency between business and engineering.

Future topics Impact value analysis – what is value and how different values can be compared. Language development for Software Intensive Systems Visualization techniques. Connection to data and system models

Thank you for your attention! Questions, comments? Thank you for your attention! Markus Kelanti University of Oulu markus.kelanti@oulu.fi www.mgroup.fi