330 likes | 516 Views
Introduction. Purpose of the paper is to report a workshop that employed creativity techniques
E N D
3. Authors state that requirements analysts lack processes to guide their creative thinking
Goals of this paper:
Do ideas generated from these workshops have an impact on requirements in the final Operational Concept of Use document?
Is analogical reasoning a cost effective creativity technique? Do the ideas generated by this technique impact the final specifications?
Introduction
6. What is RESCUE? Workshop activities are designed using three established models of creativity
Alex Osborns Creative Problem Solving (CPS) process
Henri Poincars philosophical model of creativity
Margaret Bodens three basic types of creativity
9. RESCUE Creativity Workshop Structure
11. Combinatorial: The creation of new ideas from a combination and synthesis of existing ideas.
Transformational: People change the solution space in a way that things that were considered impossible are now possible
For example, by challenging pre-conceived constraints and exploring new solutions to existing problems. RESCUE & Bodens Three Basic Types of Creativity
12. Use cases and system models were generated before the workshop by two EASM systems engineers from existing EASM documentation
A fun atmosphere was encouraged & rules about avoiding criticism and time boxing topics so people could feel free to relax and voice ideas without criticism The EASM Creativity Workshop
13. Ideas were generated by 2 different external experts and 19 stakeholders
Stakeholders were employees of Eurocontrol (natl air traffic service), military traffic control, or a major airline
The workshop started with a system wide and use case specific brainstorming session before moving into sessions that specifically incorporated one of Bodens creativity types The EASM Creativity Workshop
14. Workshop facilitators chose two different analogies: a museum exhibition and a TV program scheduler
Museums and air space management both deal with the layout and management of finite 3D space
TV program schedulers and air space management both have the same resource scheduling abstraction Using Exploratory Creativity in EASM
15. Workshop participants then listened to expert presentations on the two analogies
Afterwards, they were encouraged to find similarities between agents, objects, actions, constraints, and goals in the two analogies
Each mapping was then used to generate new ideas for EASM by transferring knowledge about solutions from the museum exhibition and TV program scheduler analogies Using Exploratory Creativity in EASM
16. Facilitators led brainstorming groups to discover as many constraints as possible on the EASM system design
Then each group contemplated the removal of each constraint to generate new EASM ideas based on this removal
Also leads stakeholders to consider trade-offs between the satisfaction of competing goals and constraints Using Transformational Creativity in EASM
17. Storyboarding was used to elaborate and combine creative ideas in the last period of the workshop
Stakeholders worked in groups and produced a storyboard that described the possible combination of requirements and ideas associated with one use case during the first 3 periods of the workshop
Using Combinatorial Creativity in EASM
18. To answer the two research questions previously mentioned . . .
Do ideas generated from these workshops have an impact on requirements in the final specifications?
Is analogical reasoning a cost effective creativity technique? Do the ideas generated by this technique impact the final specifications?
The authors analyzed the number of ideas generated by the RESCUE process and elicited data from the EASM systems engineers to determine whether the ideas were novel and useful to EASM
Workshop Results
19. Over its two day course, the workshop generated 145 ideas
28 new ideas from the regular brainstorming session on the first day
94 by identifying & removing constraints (transformational)
15 from the museum exhibition analogy
8 from the TV program scheduler analogy
4 from storyboarding (combinatorial)
Workshop Results
20. Ideas were also rated by how novel and useful they were according to Sternbergs definition of creativity
. . . the ability to produce work that is both novel (ie. original, unexpected) and appropriate (ie. useful and adaptive concerning task restraints).
A simple 3-point scale was used to rate the novelty of each idea Workshop Results
21. 1 indicated that all elements of the idea were novel
2 indicated that some elements of the idea were novel
3 indicated no novelty
2 EASM system engineers ranked each idea independently for its novelty and usefulness using this 3 point scale
Workshop Results
22. Out of the 145 ideas generated by the workshop, the engineers couldnt agree on a usefulness rating and 4 were thrown out b/c they couldnt be reviewed adequately
Of the remaining 139, only 2 ideas (one from brainstorming and one from constraint removal) were rated as being completely novel
40 of those ideas (10 from brainstorming, 9 from analogies, 21 from constraint removal) were rated as being novel in at least one element Workshop Results
23. 97 of the ideas were rated as not being novel
67 of these were generated during constraint removal
Overall approximately 30% of the ideas generated by the creativity workshop were considered novel Workshop Results
24. 76% were rated as having at least some impact (usefulness) on the EASM final specifications
Out of 106 ideas, 21 were generated from brainstorming, 17 from analogies, 68 from constraint removal
Workshop Results
25. EASM stakeholders considered the workshops to be a success
However, despite the fact that analogical reasoning occupied 2 out of 4 of the workshop periods, it only generated 15% of the total ideas
It also led to fewer novel and useful ideas than other techniques
Suggests this strategy is not as effective as hoped for
Conclusion
26. On the other hand, data gathered indicates that the workshops did impact the final requirements specification for EASM
106 of 139 ideas with some impact
28 of 139 ideas with major impact
Results from the two day workshop held four months into the EASM project carried over into subsequent requirements work for another eight months of the project
Conclusion
27. Thoughts on the Paper
28. 2 days in a 12 month project has the potential to be a cost-effective means of discovering requirements Pros of RESCUE
29. Analogies are not a cost-effective strategy
As shown in the study, they do not generate as many ideas as other processes
Need to find an analogy that has a sufficient number of ideas
People interpret analogies differently & human ability to reason analogically varies by individual
Need to find an analogy that maps correctly to your domain ? this takes time and time == money
Cons of RESCUE
30. The 3 point ratings given by the EASM systems seems subjective
The authors admit that 8 months passed between the workshop and the end of the rating process over which the engineers understanding of EASM increased
Also, the authors of this paper were present at the ratings meetings & admit themselves this could have biased the engineers to rate ideas as more useful or novel Cons of RESCUE
31. Consult more with stakeholders to find analogies that are appropriate to their domain
Good example of a paper that has a decent idea, but is not very well written
Typos & errors in math calculations do not facilitate good communication and does not make the reader inclined to take you seriously as a professional in your field of study
Improvements
32. Questions?
33. Bilton, Chris. Management and Creativity. Blackwell Publishing. 23 January 2008. <http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=6esBg4JCbm8C&dq=chris+bilton+management+and+creativity&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=2ln5mBgMJr&sig=0MjG-JW4VQYw7NgzatR2kpyKDxg>
Schmalhoffer, Franz, et al. Proceedings of Eurocogsci 03. 2003. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 25 January 2008. <http://books.google.com/books?id=GpGBZy6QGJ4C&pg=PA157&dq=boden+%2B+analogical+reasoning&lr=&ei=QWuaR7qXKozGyAT0mZxs&sig=9axTIVWrbymaxlVGuXMMgbmJ3vE#PPP1,M1> Works Cited