This paper presents some initial results from a twelve-month empirical research study of model driven engineering (MDE). Using largely qualitative questionnaire and interview methods we investigate and document a range of technical, organizational and social factors that apparently influence organizational responses to MDE: specifically, its perception as a successful or unsuccessful organizational intervention. We then outline a range of lessons learned. Whilst, as with all qualitative research, these lessons should be interpreted with care, they should also be seen as providing a greater understanding of MDE practice in industry, as well as shedding light on the varied, and occasionally surprising, social, technical and organizational factors that affect success and failure. We conclude by suggesting how the next phase of the research will attempt to investigate some of these issues from a different angle and in greater depth.

Despite lively debate over the last decade on the benefits or drawbacks of model-driven engineering (MDE), there have been very few industry-wide studies of MDE in practice. We present a new study, covering a broad range of experiences and ways of applying MDE: we surveyed 450 MDE practitioners and carried out in-depth interviews with 22 more. Findings suggest that MDE may be more widespread than commonly believed, but developers rarely use it to generate whole systems; rather, they apply it to develop key parts of a system often using domain-specific modeling languages developed specifically for the purpose. Our findings also suggest reasons why some efforts to adopt MDE fail and some succeed. As is usually the case in software engineering, adoption largely depends on social and organizational factors, some of which we describe in this paper.

BackgroundWe sought to define quality in telehealth and telecare with the aim of improving the proportion of patients who receive appropriate, acceptable and workable technologies and services to support them living with illness or disability.MethodsThis was a three-phase study: (1) interviews with seven technology suppliers and 14 service providers, (2) ethnographic case studies of 40 people, 60 to 98 years old, with multi-morbidity and assisted living needs and (3) 10 co-design workshops. In phase 1, we explored barriers to uptake of telehealth and telecare. In phase 2, we used ethnographic methods to build a detailed picture of participants’ lives, illness experiences and technology use. In phase 3, we brought users and their carers together with suppliers and providers to derive quality principles for assistive technology products and services.ResultsInterviews identified practical, material and organisational barriers to smooth introduction and continued support of assistive technologies. The experience of multi-morbidity was characterised by multiple, mutually reinforcing and inexorably worsening impairments, producing diverse and unique care challenges. Participants and their carers managed these pragmatically, obtaining technologies and adapting the home. Installed technologies were rarely fit for purpose. Support services for technologies made high (and sometimes oppressive) demands on users. Six principles emerged from the workshops. Quality telehealth or telecare is 1) ANCHORED in a shared understanding of what matters to the user; 2) REALISTIC about the natural history of illness; 3) CO-CREATIVE, evolving and adapting solutions with users; 4) HUMAN, supported through interpersonal relationships and social networks; 5) INTEGRATED, through attention to mutual awareness and knowledge sharing; 6) EVALUATED to drive system learning.ConclusionsTechnological advances are important, but must be underpinned by industry and service providers following a user-centred approach to design and delivery. For the ARCHIE principles to be realised, the sector requires: (1) a shift in focus from product (‘assistive technologies’) to performance (‘supporting technologies-in-use’); (2) a shift in the commissioning model from standardised to personalised home care contracts; and (3) a shift in the design model from ‘walled garden’, branded products to inter-operable components that can be combined and used flexibly across devices and platforms.Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0305-8.

In this paper, we attempt to address the relative absence of empirical studies of model driven engineering through describing the practices of three commercial organizations as they adopted a model driven engineering approach to their software development. Using in-depth semi-structured interviewing we invited practitioners to reflect on their experiences and selected three to use as exemplars or case studies. In documenting some details of attempts to deploy model driven practices, we identify some 'lessons learned', in particular the importance of complex organizational, managerial and social factors -as opposed to simple technical factors -in the relative success, or failure, of the endeavour. As an example of organizational change management the successful deployment of model driven engineering appears to require: a progressive and iterative approach; transparent organizational commitment and motivation; integration with existing organizational processes and a clear business focus.

No abstract