1. SoMeT 2004 Interplay of Tacit and Explicit Knowledge in Requirements Engineering Marite Kirikova Riga Technical University LATVIA

2. SoMeT 2004 What is knowledge Lock (1632-1704): “Knowledge then seems to me to be nothing but perception of the connexion of an agreement, or disagreement and repugnancy of any of our ideas” H. Davenport and L. Prusak [5]: “Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, expert insight and grounded intuition that provides an environment and framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organization it often becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms.” Sidmae: “Knowledge consists of dynamic functional structures. It comprises the unity of three following aspects: first, understanding of the reality, second, attitude to the reality, and, third, corresponding reaction.”

3. SoMeT 2004 Main emphasis on the following aspects: Systemic nature of knowledge Dynamic development of knowledge Ownership of knowledge

4. SoMeT 2004 Knowledge Dimension in Requirements Engineering

5. SoMeT 2004 Addressing tacit knowledge in ISD methodologies by Fiona M. Murphy & Dr. Larry Stapleton, presented at ISD’04, reprinted by permission

6. SoMeT 2004 Motivation Shall we consider potential availability of different types of knowledge and possibilities of its growth when choosing SE approaches? The hottest point – requirements! How interplay of tacit and explicit knowledge influences capability of the methodology?

7. SoMeT 2004 Approaches Under the Analysis Use Cases based approach Enterprise Model based approach Agile approach

8. SoMeT 2004 Object Model Knowledge integration Interviews Use cases Use Cases based approach (simplified)

9. SoMeT 2004 Interviews or group work Business Process Model Object Model Business rules Actors... Enterprise Model based approach (simplified)

10. SoMeT 2004 Interviews or group work Agile approach (simplified)

11. SoMeT 2004 Knowledge domains Knowledge about the enterprise Knowledge about the the application Knowledge about the design Knowledge possesors Use Cases based approach –User –Analyst –Designer EM based approach –Planner –Owner –Designer Agile approach –Stakeholder –Designer

12. SoMeT 2004 Knowledge types Tacit Explicit Shallow Deep Pieces Models System Knowledge features Consistency –Individual –Shared –Formal Completeness –Intuitive –Formal

13. SoMeT 2004 Analysis Transfer of tacit knowledge Transformation of tacit knowledge Design Transfer of explicit knowledge Transformation of explicit knowledge Socialisation Transfer of tacit knowledge Transformation of tacit knowledge Externalisation Transfer of tacit knowledge Transformation of explicit knowledge Combination Transfer of explicit knowledge Transformation of explicit knowledge Internalisation Transfer of explicit knowledge Transformation of tacit knowledge Implementation Transfer of explicit knowledge Transformation of explicit knowledge Knowledge elicitation Knowledge acquisition Learning Knowledge interpretation Knowledge analysis Tacit knowledge pieces Explicit knowledge models Explicit knowledge system Knowledge Processes and Related Concepts

14. SoMeT 2004 Use Cases Based Approach

15. SoMeT 2004 Use Cases Based Approach KnowledgeEnterprise Knowledge transfer (Enterprise – Application) Application Knowledge transfer (Application - Design) Design TACITTACIT Shallow Pieces U A dU DD Models U A dU DD System (U) (A) (d) (D) D Detailed Pieces U AUU A d(D)D Models U AUU A dDD System (U) (D)DD E X P LI C IT Shallow Pieces N/a Models System Detailed Pieces Models System Consistency check Individual +++ Shared Partly - Formal --Possible CompletenessIntuitiveIntuitive and use cases basedIntuitive Formal

16. SoMeT 2004 EM Based Approach

17. SoMeT 2004 EM Based Approach KnowledgeEnterprise Knowledge transfer (Enterprise – Application) Application Knowledge transfer (Application - Design) Design TACITTACIT Shallow Pieces P O d P O D Models P O d P O D D System P O (d) P O D D Detailed Pieces P O P O D D Models P O P O D D System (P) (O) (D) E X P LI C IT Shallow Pieces Models System Detailed Pieces Models System Consistency check Individual +++ Shared +++ Formal +++ Relative completenessIntuitive Formal Intuitive Formal Intuitive Formal

18. SoMeT 2004 Agile Approach

19. SoMeT 2004 Agile Approach KnowledgeEnterprise Knowledge transfer (Enterprise – Application) Application Knowledge transfer (Application - Design) Design TACITTACIT Shallow Pieces S D DD Models S D DD System S D DD Detailed Pieces S D DD Models S D DD System (S) (D) (D) E X P LI C IT Shallow Pieces Models System Detailed Pieces Models System Consistency check Individual +++ Shared +++ Formal --- Relative completeness Supported by S involvement Intuitive Formal

20. SoMeT 2004 How does the approaches look from the point of view of knowledge? How capable are they? Let us look at potential knowledge growth patterns...

21. SoMeT 2004 Agile Use-case based Enterprise model based Diversity of views Size of project knowledge system (tacit+explicit) Depth of knowledge

22. SoMeT 2004 Conclusions: Capability of approaches Traditional use-cases based approach is most suitable for middle sized, projects where as-is rather than to-be enterprise system is to be supported by new software applications Enterprise model based approach is suitable for large size systems with a potential explicit knowledge reuse. It can be used for as-is enterprises as well as for to-be enterprises, and can handle frequent changes in requirements Agile approach is suitable for small and middle- sized projects, it can handle frequent changes, and is useful for both as-is enterprise applications and to- be enterprise applications

23. SoMeT 2004 Answers to the stated questions Shall we consider potential availability of different types of knowledge and possibilities of its growth when choosing SE approaches? YES How interplay of tacit and explicit knowledge influences capability of the methodology? –Natural flow of knowledge creation –Both tacit and explicit systems knowledge –Transfer of both tacit and explicit knowledge –Appropriate depth of both tacit and explicit knowledge

24. SoMeT 2004 Future work Analysis of knowledge processes and respectively potential capabilities of other approaches such as: Components based development Patterns based development Natural language based development Adoption of ERP systems Etc.