China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
A model for managing organizational knowledge
Published in Charles A. Tryon, Managing Organizational Knowledge, 2016
The most recognized pillar of this model is the by-product of the projects and processes pillars. The projects pillar indicates when knowledge will be used or created, the processes pillar captures how an organization wishes the work to be performed, and the artifacts pillar identifies what explicit knowledge is most highly valued by the organization. Among common artifacts are written documents, engineering schematics, requirements, specifications, drawings, graphical models, reports, analysis, legal findings, financial reports, research papers, designs, policies, and operational procedures. Literally, anything your organization deems significant and reusable will show up in the artifacts pillar. To determine the artifacts most valuable to an organization, qualified communities of practice should examine the natural by-products of their best practices or processes. Each recognized formal process should provide multiple artifact candidates. Look for artifacts where the results from one document become input to a subsequent document.
Applied Cognitive Work Analysis: A Pragmatic Methodology for Designing Revolutionary Cognitive Affordances
Published in Erik Hollnagel, Handbook of Cognitive Task Design, 2003
William C. Elm, Scott S. Potter, James W. Gualtieri, James R. Easter, Emilie M. Roth
In the ACWA analysis and design approach, we create design artifacts that capture the results of each of these intermediate stages in the design process. These design artifacts form a continuous design thread that provides a principled, traceable link from cognitive analysis to design. The design progress occurs in the thought and work in accomplishing each step of the process, however, by the process of generating these artifacts. The artifacts serve as a post hoc mechanism to record the results of the design thinking and as stepping-stones for the subsequent step of the process. Each intermediate artifact also provides an opportunity to evaluate the completeness and quality of the analysis and design effort, enabling modifications to be made early in the process. The linkage between artifacts also ensures an integrative process; changes in one artifact cascade along the design thread, necessitating changes to all. Figure 16.1 provides a visual depiction of the sequence of methodological steps and their associated output artifacts, as well as an indication that the process is typically repeated in several expanding spirals, each resulting in an improved decision support system. The remainder of this chapter describes each step of this approach.
Change Impact Analysis Methods
Published in Madapuri Rudra Kumar, Kalli Srinivasa Nageswara Prasad, Annaluri Sreenivasa Rao, Vinit Kumar Gunjan, Change Request Impacts in Software Maintenance, 2020
Madapuri Rudra Kumar, Kalli Srinivasa Nageswara Prasad, Annaluri Sreenivasa Rao, Vinit Kumar Gunjan
Change Impact Analysis techniques are broadly classified into two categories [56]: static and dynamic Change Impact Analysis approaches. The static Change Impact Analysis techniques approach is engaged in developing a group of possible affected classes through evaluating the project’s static information that is developed from different artefacts. A few of software artefacts include requirement artefacts, design artefacts, class artefacts and test artefacts. In contrast, the dynamic approach is involved in developing a group of possible affected classes by assessing the dynamic information. The following sub-section describes each Change Impact Analysis category.
Extending a Theory of Slow Technology for Design through Artifact Analysis
Published in Human–Computer Interaction, 2022
William Odom, Erik Stolterman, Amy Yo Sue Chen
Through its application, artifact analysis can iteratively lead to stable and well-formed definitions of artifact qualities that can inform the design of new artifacts. The outcome of an artifact analysis is critical and theoretical but it also has a practical purpose. It is critical in the sense that it intentionally challenges intuitive or everyday understandings of artifacts and their qualities, and makes it possible to ask new questions. It is theoretical in the sense that it leads to conceptual constructs that make it possible to more precisely define artifact qualities, their relationships and trade-offs. Our treatment of the term ‘theory’ is aligned with Gaver (2012) and Redström’s (2017) related arguments that design theory should not be seen as conclusive and fixed, but rather as unfolding and transitional. We do not aim to create a comprehensive theory of design but rather view theory as “an annotation of realised design examples, and particularly portfolios of related pieces” (W. Gaver, 2012, p. 937). By drawing on basic terms and definitions of slow technology as formulated in Hallnäs and Redström (2001) original visionary work, we aim to work toward more complex concepts through first-hand insights of design practice. Artifact analysis offers a structured approach to supporting this process.