Domain-specific reasoning for method engineering based on Toulmin's argumentation theory Online publication date: Sat, 31-Jan-2015
by Sebastian Bittmann; Balbir Barn; Tony Clark
International Journal of Knowledge and Learning (IJKL), Vol. 9, No. 1/2, 2014
Abstract: Methods that address enterprise-wide representation and analysis must support the full range of stakeholder requirements from business strategy through to IT infrastructure. Often such methods present a formalism, such as process models, that are unrelated to the natural language used for justification, analysis and communication of designs. The problem to be solved is to provide a structured basis for closing this gap. This paper proposes an argumentative method engineering approach, derived from Toulmin's argumentation model, for expressing design decisions, their associated convictions, and stakeholder negotiation. In addition to representing the support for design decisions, the approach justifies these claims by referring to already established knowledge. The argumentative approach enables the sophisticated management and reuse of knowledge during the development and extension of methods. The approach is evaluated using a case study, in which a software development method was outsourced to contractors.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Knowledge and Learning (IJKL):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook