Presentation slides from the WICSA 2014 conference

1. Systematic Architectural Decisions
Management
A Process-based Approach
Ana Dragomir
Horst Lichter
Tiberiu Marian Budau
WICSA 2014, Sydney
07.04.2014

2. Roadmap

3. Introduction
More than just design!
Software Architecture = {Elements, Form, Rationale}
Rationale is usually embodied in architecture decisions (ADs)
ADs should be explicit and documented for future reference
 Became a reality in the industry also!

4. Motivation
Our industry cooperation partner documents ADs
 Benefits are company-wide acknowledged
 But…improvements were necessary
Are ADs well communicated? Are ADs easily retrievable?
Is our decision process good enough?
How does an external observer
perceive it?
How good are we,
compared to the state of the art?
How can we improve?

5. Goals
Analyze the current decision making process
Identify improvement potentials
Propose an enhanced concept for decision making

6. Analysis
Analyze the current decision making process
 Initial meeting
 Analysis of ADs repositories of two large projects
(45000 and 9000 IT person days)
 12 follow-up discussions (semi-structured)
Identify improvement potentials
Propose an enhanced concept for decision making

7. Current Process
possibly ask others
Well established template:
• Title
• Problem description
• Identified alternatives
• Prioritized criteria
• Quantification
• Chosen alternative
• Invoked stakeholders
• Derived requirements
• Related decisions, etc.
• Several mediums
• Many inconsistencies

8. Remarks
The “nature” of the ADs was different then expected
<10% contained component diagrams or lines and boxes
Inter-decision relations are almost never documented
 When asked if useful, the architects were reluctant
 “Implies” received the most acknowledgement
The industry is behind the state of the art
 Alternatives not only identified, but also semi-subjectively quantified
However…much documented knowledge, little reuse
 Many inconsistencies (even within the same project)
 Rudimentary process

9. Goals
Analyze the current decision making process
Identify improvement potentials
Propose an enhanced concept for decision making

10. Improvement Potentials
ADs should be …
 documented in a central location
 documented based on an enforced model
 easily retrievable
 “search all decisions of the PROJECT PRJ11 that affect the COMPONENT
CRM and violate the COMPANY-GUIDELINE CG10”
 easy to be communicated
 Push mechanisms
 Subscribe mechanisms – “notify me when decisions in the context of
PROJECT PRJ11 are made”
 learned from
 Active/passive feedback

11. Goals
Analyze the current decision making process
Identify improvement potentials
Propose an enhanced concept for decision making

12. Improved process

13. Conclusions
Analysis of the current state of the practice
The situation is much better than expected but…
Improvement potentials were found
A process-oriented approach to boost informal learning was proposed

14. Future work
Capitalize on existing informal learning techniques
Develop metrics and dashboards to aid in the AD management process.
Tool support

15. Thank you!!!
ADs should be …
 documented in a central location
 documented based on an enforced model
 easily retrievable
 easy to be communicated
 learned from active/passive feedback