139
Foundations in Systems Integration
determine that the subjective and objective classifications be the frames in
which integration is viewed and enacted. Further, the unique relation between
objects and processes in their elemental forms shows that they are not comparable, and they relate through other classifications, and have distinct,
determinable values. For interaction and integration, the ontology we seek
is objects, EMMI, and processes.
Subjective and Objective Ontology
Objects and processes have been both implied and stated as ontological structures for business systems (Tronstad 1997), architecture (Koopman 1995),
socioeconomic issues (Osorio et al. 2010), and a myriad of other applications
(Gailey 1985; Breuker et al. 1997). Objects as metaphysical entities have a long
history of debate and deliberation, extending back in time for 2000 years.
Objects are vestiges of the functional viewpoint—the view that what the
product or service must do is based on physical objects that produce various
behaviors (Shishko 1995; Harel and Politi 1998; Defense Acquisition University
2001; Rodriguez et al. 2004; Guenov and Barker 2005; Eriksson et al. 2008;
Cechini et al. 2009; Do et al. 2010). That objects and processes (among other
are choices for representing many things human-built) are the raison d’être for
systems engineering is based on the necessity of testing and demonstration to
verify that the work is appropriate to satisfy the requirements and to validate
the product or service for utility and fitness of use. The functional view is
objective; objects are objective. Objective measures can be quantitative or
qualitative, but both types deal with the numerical counts of items.
Processes are subjective. Subjective implies things influenced by personal
feelings, biases, or intuitive thoughts. Subjective measures are reflected in
survey or questionnaires that respondents use to express their opinions or
interpretations of events, nonfinancial deciphering of business, operations,
or product and service utilities, and use (Chow 2006). Sometimes, subjective
measures are used to determine how a constraint or condition impacts on
development work or integration (for example). The subjective data provide
insights into what moderation and interpretations are necessary to go along
with the objective data for planning tasks and allocating resources to complete integration (NASA 1990). Processes are subjective both by their design
and their enactment.
While both objective and subjective measures are necessary (neither one
being sufficient with the other), the correlation between them is poor (Parsons
2005). Systems engineering and in particular systems engineering integration rely on both objective and subjective measures to bring a product or
service to its deliverable configuration and operability. The combining of
objective and subjective measures is particularly important for our ontology
Foundations in Systems Integration
determine that the subjective and objective classifications be the frames in
which integration is viewed and enacted. Further, the unique relation between
objects and processes in their elemental forms shows that they are not comparable, and they relate through other classifications, and have distinct,
determinable values. For interaction and integration, the ontology we seek
is objects, EMMI, and processes.
Subjective and Objective Ontology
Objects and processes have been both implied and stated as ontological structures for business systems (Tronstad 1997), architecture (Koopman 1995),
socioeconomic issues (Osorio et al. 2010), and a myriad of other applications
(Gailey 1985; Breuker et al. 1997). Objects as metaphysical entities have a long
history of debate and deliberation, extending back in time for 2000 years.
Objects are vestiges of the functional viewpoint—the view that what the
product or service must do is based on physical objects that produce various
behaviors (Shishko 1995; Harel and Politi 1998; Defense Acquisition University
2001; Rodriguez et al. 2004; Guenov and Barker 2005; Eriksson et al. 2008;
Cechini et al. 2009; Do et al. 2010). That objects and processes (among other
are choices for representing many things human-built) are the raison d’être for
systems engineering is based on the necessity of testing and demonstration to
verify that the work is appropriate to satisfy the requirements and to validate
the product or service for utility and fitness of use. The functional view is
objective; objects are objective. Objective measures can be quantitative or
qualitative, but both types deal with the numerical counts of items.
Processes are subjective. Subjective implies things influenced by personal
feelings, biases, or intuitive thoughts. Subjective measures are reflected in
survey or questionnaires that respondents use to express their opinions or
interpretations of events, nonfinancial deciphering of business, operations,
or product and service utilities, and use (Chow 2006). Sometimes, subjective
measures are used to determine how a constraint or condition impacts on
development work or integration (for example). The subjective data provide
insights into what moderation and interpretations are necessary to go along
with the objective data for planning tasks and allocating resources to complete integration (NASA 1990). Processes are subjective both by their design
and their enactment.
While both objective and subjective measures are necessary (neither one
being sufficient with the other), the correlation between them is poor (Parsons
2005). Systems engineering and in particular systems engineering integration rely on both objective and subjective measures to bring a product or
service to its deliverable configuration and operability. The combining of
objective and subjective measures is particularly important for our ontology