Comments on: Can we elevate constraints in the requirements process to encourage creativity? http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/the-power-of-constraints-to-encourage-creativity/ Advance Your Business Analysis Career Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:08:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Nathan Caswell http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/the-power-of-constraints-to-encourage-creativity/comment-page-1/#comment-1089 Nathan Caswell Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:02:40 +0000 http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/?p=953#comment-1089 btw ... I would point out that requirements make very poor boundary objects. btw … I would point out that requirements make very poor boundary objects.

]]> By: Nathan Caswell http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/the-power-of-constraints-to-encourage-creativity/comment-page-1/#comment-1088 Nathan Caswell Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:00:56 +0000 http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/?p=953#comment-1088 a few related works that might be interesting: Design Rules, Vol. 1: The Power of Modularity, Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, MIT Press 2000 and Star SL & Griesemer JR (1989). "Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39". Social Studies of Science 19 (4): 387–420 The first develops the theory of design rules (very similar to the Toyota constraints) that put a dependency matrix into block diagonal form (or nearly so). What this means is that each "block" represents a module that can be developed independently as long as the overlap with other modules (in it language the sub system interface :) is respected. It turns out that many broad dependencies can be factored and fixed to create modular systems out of apparent chaos. More recent work has focused on software systems, particularly the difference between open source and proprietary development approaches. The second is all about the notion of "boundary objects". A boundary object is tangible that is shared between two domains but which has different semantics in those domains. The situation described in the paper is about the communication between hunters and trappers and academic museum naturalists and biologists. The boundary object is the pelt and the condition of the pelt. For auto designers, the car and its various models (both physical and computer generated) are the boundary object. Designers (in this case visual style design) and think about systems of shape and color while the manufacturing designers think about rigidity, draw depth, and waste material. This, implicit, concept is crucial to the operation of the "big room". In theory, a structured facilitation like JAD depends on focus around boundary objects, but representations are ID derived (disadvantaging one side) and have a misplaced focus on working as a team, rather than as an inter-domain discussion where each domain needs to go off and discuss among them selves. For example, to we really want the subcutaneous fat scraped off the skunk skin before we get it? If you put these together with the "don't make any decisions until you really have to" rule, I think you get much of the design process. a few related works that might be interesting:
Design Rules, Vol. 1: The Power of Modularity, Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, MIT Press 2000

and

Star SL & Griesemer JR (1989). “Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39″. Social Studies of Science 19 (4): 387–420

The first develops the theory of design rules (very similar to the Toyota constraints) that put a dependency matrix into block diagonal form (or nearly so). What this means is that each “block” represents a module that can be developed independently as long as the overlap with other modules (in it language the sub system interface :) is respected. It turns out that many broad dependencies can be factored and fixed to create modular systems out of apparent chaos. More recent work has focused on software systems, particularly the difference between open source and proprietary development approaches.

The second is all about the notion of “boundary objects”. A boundary object is tangible that is shared between two domains but which has different semantics in those domains. The situation described in the paper is about the communication between hunters and trappers and academic museum naturalists and biologists. The boundary object is the pelt and the condition of the pelt. For auto designers, the car and its various models (both physical and computer generated) are the boundary object. Designers (in this case visual style design) and think about systems of shape and color while the manufacturing designers think about rigidity, draw depth, and waste material. This, implicit, concept is crucial to the operation of the “big room”. In theory, a structured facilitation like JAD depends on focus around boundary objects, but representations are ID derived (disadvantaging one side) and have a misplaced focus on working as a team, rather than as an inter-domain discussion where each domain needs to go off and discuss among them selves. For example, to we really want the subcutaneous fat scraped off the skunk skin before we get it?

If you put these together with the “don’t make any decisions until you really have to” rule, I think you get much of the design process.

]]> By: Nathan Caswell http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/the-power-of-constraints-to-encourage-creativity/comment-page-1/#comment-1087 Nathan Caswell Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:56:49 +0000 http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/?p=953#comment-1087 -- It would make life so much easier, but GM has had a long time to look at Toyota and is still baffled. Indeed, most American manufacturers are running in the opposite direction, outsourcing manufacturing for cost reduction. -- I think the 'constraints', are more like optimization constraints: less than, greater than or between conditions. Can you say some more about how it is applied to agile? – It would make life so much easier, but GM has had a long time to look at Toyota and is still baffled. Indeed, most American manufacturers are running in the opposite direction, outsourcing manufacturing for cost reduction.

– I think the ‘constraints’, are more like optimization constraints: less than, greater than or between conditions.

Can you say some more about how it is applied to agile?

]]> By: Rod Claar http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/the-power-of-constraints-to-encourage-creativity/comment-page-1/#comment-1085 Rod Claar Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:09:28 +0000 http://www.bridging-the-gap.com/?p=953#comment-1085 Nice article, Laura. Another thing to realize is that the constraints of a requirement are continuously refined and narrowed until the "feature" (door panel, alternator, software system) is good enough and the cost of the next step exceeds the benefit. Nice article, Laura. Another thing to realize is that the constraints of a requirement are continuously refined and narrowed until the “feature” (door panel, alternator, software system) is good enough and the cost of the next step exceeds the benefit.

]]>