The Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory of software design

Abstract

Understanding software design practice is critical to understanding modern information systems development. New developments in empirical software engineering, information systems design science and the interdisciplinary design literature combined with recent advances in process theory and testability have created a situation ripe for innovation. Consequently, this paper utilizes these breakthroughs to formulate a process theory of software design practice: SensemakingCoevolution-Implementation Theory explains how complex software systems are created by collocated software development teams in organizations. It posits that an independent agent (design team) creates a software system by alternating between three activities: organizing their perceptions about the context, mutually refining their understandings of the context and design space, and manifesting their understanding of the design space in a technological artifact. This theory development paper defines and illustrates Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory, grounds its concepts and relationships in existing literature, conceptually evaluates the theory and situates it in the broader context of information systems development.

Software engineering process theory: A multi-method comparison of Sensemaking–Coevolution–Implementation Theory and Function–Behavior–Structure Theory

“…Fifth, both theories bring some a priori credibility. SCI originated in the SE field to explaining SE process phenomena [36]. It synthesizes highly influential previous research including…”

“…For example, when Fitzgerald [35] states, "in conventional software development, the development lifecycle in its most generic form comprises four broad phases: planning, analysis, design, and implementation" (p. 589), he is treating Waterfall as a theory.However, methods are not appropriate foundations for process theories as the former prescribe ostensibly good approaches to an activity while the latter explain the fundamental properties of an activity [10]. Therefore, this sections focuses on process theories, not methods or other prescriptions.A recent review [36] found no comprehensive software development process theories.However, it did find an engineering design process theory, the Function-Behavior-Structure Framework, which had been applied to SE, and proposed but not empirically test an alternative called Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory (discussed next).…”

The Two Paradigms of Software Design

“…In SE and ISD, the planning model underlies stage-gate or lifecycle views of the design process (Boehm, 1988;Royce, 1970), plan-driven methods (Jacobson et al, 1999;Kruchten, 2003), and the perceived need for significant upfront analysis. Meanwhile, the improvisation model underlies teleological views of the design processes (Ralph, 2013;Stacey & Nandhakumar, 2009), agile methods (Beck, 2005;Schwaber, 2004) what phases will the project pass through? Invoking IDT, a rationalist would argue that the planner may answer these questions using intuition and deduction; however, an empiricist would argue that to the extent these questions could be answered at all, they could only be answered by first building the system.…”

“…An alternative to SDLC is Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory (SCI). SCI (Ralph, 2013) posits that complex software systems are produced primarily through its three titular activities (Figure 4, Sensemaking the process where the design agent perceives its and the design object's environments and organizes these perceptions to create or to refine the mental picture of context Coevolution the process where the design agent simultaneously refines its mental picture of the design object, based on its mental picture of context, and the inverse Implementation the process where the design agent generates or updates the design object using its mental picture of the design object Of course, SDLC and SCI are not the only theories pertaining to the software development process. The Function-Behavior-Structure Framework of engineering design (FBS) posits that a design agent manipulates models of the functions (goals), behaviors and structure of an artifact to produce a detailed specification suitable for informing construction (Gero, 1990;Gero & Kannengiesser, 2004).…”

Substantially Evolutionary Theorizing in Designing Software-Intensive Systems

“…Ralph [23] who estimated possible inheritances from process theories with the point of view "how and why an entity changes and develops".…”