How to combine tools and methods in practice — A field study

Abstract

In spring 1989 we surveyed the experiences of some Finnish companies in methodology modelling (metamodelling) and adaptation of tools and methodologies to each other (methodology adaptation). The companies represented software production, banking, wood and metal industry, and wholesale trade. The study was carried out as a field study where we interviewed method developers, systems analysts and their supervisors. The goal of the survey was to find out whether there was need for metamodelling or methodology adaptation in general and how this need had been satisfied. The study shows that a little experience had been gained in adapting data dictionaries to methodologies but no such attempts had been made with CASE tools. One reason for this was that few methodological guidelines were extensively employed and supported in organisations. In general no systematic approach had been followed in the adaptation. We also explored possible causes for encountered difficulties and conditions for successful metamodelling and methodology adaptation. A crucial success factor was the adaptability and ease of use of the tool. In general the causes for the success are similar to those of information systems development in general. These include sufficient resources and management support, concrete benefits for those who do the actual work and friendly user interfaces.