Hi Tony,
In my response I didn't mean to imply that for larger scale projects use cases are the best way to model the "AS-IS" of an organization.
If I was forced to pick only one tool I would choose a process flow diagram, probably using BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation) to model it. Nothing better to model business processes than a business process diagram.
If I was allowed to use two tools then I would definitely add the Business Entity Model because before even talking about how data flows within a system I would want to define the actual data to ensure that everybody knows what we are talking about.
Then I would create data flow diagrams which shows how data (as defined by the Business Entity Model) flows among processes. I agree with you that an ERD would not be needed at this point - thanks for correct me on this one.
- Adrian
Tony
It's hard to fault your logic. (I reckon context diagrams and entity diagrams are excellent tools also.)
But it seems to me that the failure you cite isn't in the modelling tools - it was in the people. Your thoughts?
Craig:
I am personally very familiar with one of the engineering managers who tried to use a Method-H-like approach to cature the as-is (of how this large this large software\electrical engineering company develops software). This guy is leading a charge to move the developers away from ad-hoc requirements specification to more formal requirements documentation. Very few others within this company have the proper focus to successfully use any formal as-is modeling technique. And yet I can not use his documentation in my task of larger scale integration. It is just to incomplete, nebulous, and wrong.
It is not his fault. I do not believe it is not humanly possible to come up with an integrated understanding of the inputs and outputs for a large series of interacting functions by basically looking at inputs and outputs of single functions in isolation.
brought to you by enabling practitioners & organizations to achieve their goals using: