ATINER's Conference Paper Series LNG2015-1816 · ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: LNG2015-1816 6 down between groups, the same holds true for professional culture.” (Herkenhoff

ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: LNG2014-1176

1

Athens Institute for Education and Research

ATINER

ATINER's Conference Paper Series

LNG2015-1816

Joern Fahsel

Research Associate & PhD Candidate

Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuernberg (FAU)

Germany

Ruediger Weißbach

Professor

Hamburg University of Applied Sciences (HAW Hamburg)

Germany

Andrea Herrmann

Freelance Software Engineering Trainer

Germany

Standardized Individual Output Development:

Linguistic Approaches for Requirements Engineering

Problems Through Cultural Differences - Case Studies

from Requirements Engineering Education in the

Context of E-Publishing at the Chair of Book Studies


2

An Introduction to

ATINER's Conference Paper Series

ATINER started to publish this conference papers series in 2012. It includes only the

papers submitted for publication after they were presented at one of the conferences

organized by our Institute every year. This paper has been peer reviewed by at least two

academic members of ATINER.

Dr. Gregory T. Papanikos

President


This paper should be cited as follows:

Fahsel, J., Weißbach, R. and Herrmann, A. (2016). "Standardized Individual

Output Development: Linguistic Approaches for Requirements Engineering

Problems Through Cultural Differences - Case Studies from Requirements

Engineering Education in the Context of E-Publishing at the Chair of Book

Studies", Athens: ATINER'S Conference Paper Series, No: LNG2015-1816.


8 Valaoritou Street, Kolonaki, 10671 Athens, Greece

Tel: + 30 210 3634210 Fax: + 30 210 3634209 Email: [email protected] URL:

www.atiner.gr

URL Conference Papers Series: www.atiner.gr/papers.htm

Printed in Athens, Greece by the Athens Institute for Education and Research. All rights

reserved. Reproduction is allowed for non-commercial purposes if the source is fully

acknowledged.

ISSN: 2241-2891

04/02/2016


3

Standardized Individual Output Development:

Linguistic Approaches for Requirements Engineering Problems

Through Cultural Differences - Case Studies from

Requirements Engineering Education in the Context of E-

Publishing at the Chair of Book Studies

Joern Fahsel

Research Associate & PhD Candidate

Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuernberg (FAU)

Germany

Ruediger Weißbach

Professor

Hamburg University of Applied Sciences (HAW Hamburg)

Germany

Andrea Herrmann

Freelance Software Engineering Trainer

Germany

Abstract

In this paper, the approach of Standardized Individual Output Development is

investigated in relation to the use of linguistic standards to resolve cultural

differences in the requirements engineering. For that culture and requirements

as problem-space and the theory of Standardized Individual Development as

solution-space are described as a basis for the subsequent empirical

investigation by a case study.

Keywords: Standardized Individual Output Development, Linguistic, Culture,

Requirements Engineering, Transfer, Creativity


4

Introduction

“The limits of our language are the limits of our (cultural) world.”

(Wittgenstein 1922). Wittgenstein's statement combines the challenge of

communication through natural language: Natural language consists of the

technical aspect (grammar) and the meaning as a bundle of semantics,

pragmatics and culture (Watzlawick et al. 1974; Rupp et al. 2009; Wittgenstein

1922). The cultural aspect can lead to defects in the requirements analysis of

systems – Cause for subsequent design flaws and ultimately for economic or

harm to people, in the case of construction errors in the automotive or aircraft

development. The challenges of cultural differences are to analyze and derive

solutions. Transmissions of linguistic approaches are a way to solve the

problem (Rupp et al. 2009). The contribution enters the debate at this point.

Challenges are worked out regarding the cultural perspective and the value

of natural language for requirements engineering and examples of analysis

techniques in linguistics are presented. Based on the implicit description of an

instance of the reuse of concepts from linguistics, their use in psychotherapy

for Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) (Bandler et al. 1982), the theory of

Standardized Individual Development is presented (Fahsel et al. 2014). As a

result, it is shown how the problem of abstraction leads to new solutions

through the transfer of abstracted existing solutions. As an outlook, a holistic

approach is outlined, a lingua franca of modeling approaches from the

Linguistics connects to a unified concept language that cultural boundaries of

language overcomes, and as an example of the economic sustainability of the

humanities, in the specific case of linguistics. Methodically, the research

objective will be implemented as follows: First, the problem of cultural

differences in requirements engineering will be investigate literature based.

Then the own approach to Standardized Individual Output Development is

presented as a theoretical basis for a systematic solution finding. Problem and

solution approach form the basis for subsequent empirical survey on the

research approach of the case study. Conclusion of the essay forms the

summary of the results and an outlook.

Cultural Aspects

The engineering process is a multi-step transformation of ideas into

artifacts (Herrmann et al. 2014), in which RE is the first step for transforming

ideas of future users or their representatives (managers etc.) in a representation.

Each actor in this process is influenced by his/her own cultural context. Studies

on intercultural aspects in international cooperation emphasize the influence of

different national or ethnic cultures that has an impact on the handling of

requirements, for example in the aspect of the non-critical acceptance of the

requirement documents, even if they contain unrealistic requirements (e.g.

Overhage et al. 2010, von Stettn et al. 2012).

But the term “culture” is not restricted to national or ethnic aspects.

Hofstede defines culture as “the collective programming of the mind


5

distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from another”

(Hofstede 2014). Therefore, we have to consider aspects of organizational

culture and of professional culture besides international aspects. All these types

of cultural aspects can be described by the six Hofstede (Hofstede 1980)

factors of culture: Power distance, Individualism vs. collectivism, Uncertainty

avoidance index, Masculinity, Long-term orientation vs. short term orientation,

Indulgence versus restraint (Hofstede 1980).

The obviously most discussed aspects of interculturality are international

aspects. Hofstede defines that “The category can refer to nations, regions

within or across nations, ethnicities, religions, occupations, organizations, or

the genders.” (Hofstede 2014). This dimension of interculturality is widely

accepted and discussed in science and in practical work and trainings.

“Globalization” of business is an awareness driver for international aspects.

The usage of different languages in different nations influences directly the RE

process.

A second influencing factor is the organizational culture. This is –

according to (Schein 1984) – “the pattern of basic assumptions that a given

group has invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its

problems of external adaption and internal integration”. Hofstede observed:

“[…] organizational cultures – that is, the differences in collective mental

programming found among people from different organizations, or parts

thereof, within the same national context. […] Whereas national cultures

differed primarily in their values, organizational cultures turned out to differ

mainly in their practices.” (Hofstede 2001, p. 373). The six dimensions of

organizational culture according to Hofstede (Hofstede 2001, pp. 397-399) are:

“process-oriented versus results-oriented,

employee-oriented versus job oriented,

parochial versus professional,

open versus closed (communication climate),

loose versus tight amount of internal structuring, and

normative versus pragmatic”.

The organizational culture focuses on the internal relationships within an

organization. The learning experiences of a company, its strategy and its

tradition are important aspects. Hofstede (The Hofstede Center 2014) lists the

following dimensions of organizational culture: means-oriented vs. goal-

oriented, internally driven vs. externally driven, Easygoing work discipline vs.

Strict work discipline, Local vs. Professional, Open system vs. Closed system,

Employee-oriented vs. Work-oriented, Degree of acceptance of leadership

style, Degree of identification with your organization.

The third influencing factor of interculturality is the professional culture.

There is not as much literature on professional cultures as on national or

organizational cultures. Herkenhoff measures differences between professional

cultures using the Hofstede dimensions (Herkenhoff 2010). She points out the

relationship between the professional cultures and the national cultures: “Just

as Hofstede notes that national culture is not genetically shared but is passed


6

down between groups, the same holds true for professional culture.”

(Herkenhoff 2010). One aspect for example is the long-term vs. short-term

orientation of professions (Bond 1988). In this dimension, computer

programmers and other people engaged in project work may be short-term

focused.

Herkenhoff (Herkenhoff 2010) developed a Professional Culture

questionnaire (PC08) based on Hofstede/Bond as a tool for measuring along

the dimensions of Power, Time, Risk, Service and Team. In her study, she

compares professional culture rankings of people working in accounting, IT

support, sales and science. Referring to the five dimensions of professional

culture (Power, Time, Risk, Service, Team) IT staff shows high ranking values

for team orientation and service, but only low values for long term orientation.

In some disciplines, stereotyped archetypes of persons and their character

behavior exist. For professions in the healthcare business, Hall (Hall 2005)

describes such differences and shows that the interaction with other professions

is limited with increasing specialization of learners (Hall 2005, Hall and

Weaver 2001).

According to Hall 2005, an individual has its own cognitive map, which

“develops as a consequence of the educational and socialization experiences of

the students of each profession, built on each student’s own unique cognitive

and constitutional make-up. This map is a major component of the culture of

each profession.” In this description all three aspects of culture are influencing

the mind of the individual. In IT business a study on communication problems

in distributed software development (Stein and Herrmann 2013) shows cultural

differences not only between countries, but also between different

organizational cultures, younger and older people and different professional

cultures (like software developers versus managers or customers).

With a slightly different meaning, some authors in the related Business

Process Management domain (see the literature review of von Brocke and

Sinnl 2011) discuss about “subgroup levels” (Leidner and Keyworth 2006) or

“work group cultures” (Baba and Falkenburg 1996 and others). It is important

to consider that all these cultural factors – international, organizational,

professional – together with the influence of other individuals and groups will

influence the individual position and the individual behavior of the actors in

the RE process.

Figure 1 shows the influences from the three cultural aspects on the actors

in the requirements process. The difference in the cultural settings complicates

the communication process. Furthermore, the language itself is influenced by

nation, profession and organization, with descending impact.


7

Figure 1. Three Different Cultural Influences in the RE Process

The differences in the cultural aspects may vary between the different

settings. While Figure 1 shows a possible situation in an international setting

with a consulting company (doing the requirements engineering) and a

customer’s company, Figure 2 describes a typical “inhouse” situation in a SME

with only internal staff from one nation.

Figure 2. A Different Setting of Cultural Influences in the RE Process

Standardized Individual Output Development

The concept of the Standardized Individual Output Development can

generally be understood as an approach to the development of output using its

own standards, or re-use of standards from other domains via analogies.

Objective is a systematic and qualitative creation of individual output on the

one hand. On the other hand the innovation support on knowledge transfer in

the first and future step by mechanical creativity. Subsequently, the core ideas

and principles are introduced.

Starting from a requirement there is a concrete output creation using the

concept of Standardizing Individual Output Development. The result of this

process is the Standardized Individual Output. Figure 3 visualizes the overall

process.


8

Figure 3. Interactions of the Standardized Individual Output Development

Source: Schacht and Hertel 2009.

Fundamentals of the approach are the work of Göpfert (2009), the concept

of individual output and the mass customization (Piller 2001). Göpfert

describes the individual output as a transition from craft to mass production

through standardization and automation to individual output via standardized

process modules which are not visible for the customers (Fahsel et al. 2014;

Lasi et al. 2014). Similarly argued Piller (2001) with the strategic approach of

mass customization as a strategy variant between standardization on one hand

and differentiation called mass production on the other.

Based on these basic considerations the Standardized Individual Output

Development describes a design process in terms of a reference model for the

development of customized outputs through a systematic re-use their own

standards or other domains through analogies. A conceptualization of the core

idea is carried out via the framework of the Standardized Individual

Development Cube (SIC), which is interpreted both as a synthesis of different

approaches and in the subsequent step as an analytical tool.

The SIC as a synthesis embraces the connection of standards within a

domain and the value chain in an output process – called the Standard Catalog.

Regarding to the output development on the re-use of standards from other

domains, the SIC includes the dimensions domain and standards – called the

Standard Innovation (Figure 4).


9

Figure 4. Framework as a Cube

Source: Fahsel and Schleifer 2015; based on Process Cube approach of van der Aalst 2013.

A brief introduction is following of the Standard Catalog and Standard

Innovation as an interpretation of slices of a cube that is based on the OLAP

(Online Analyctical Processing)-Cubes operation of slicing (inspired by

discussion by van der Aalst 2013 to Process Cubes). The Standard Catalog as

vertical slice is here interpreted as a function of standard and value chain and

based on the work of Schacht (2009) and Fettke and Loos (2002).

Schacht discussed the one hand, the interpretation of standards as explicit

knowledge; he furthermore classifies standard categories and allocates the

value chain to individual standards. Building on this idea standard categories

have been defined on the one hand in the SIC as a synthesis of the work of

Schacht and Hertel (2009) and as a transfer of product-, output view and

integrated communication techniques of the ARIS-Framework (Scheer 1999).

The genesis of the approaches leads to the following characteristic values of

the standard dimension: product/quality standards, process standards and

communication standards.

The idea of domain-specific storage of standard knowledge based on the

work of Fettke and Loos (2002) who formulated a catalog of specific process

standards called reference model. In summary, the vertical slice in SIC is called

Standard catalog and describes the idea to understand standards as knowledge

to assign this standards to the value chain (Schacht 2009) and to provide

(intelligent) searchable knowledge Databases in a subsequent step (Fettke and

Loos 2002). Here the question arises, according to the development of output

demands, for which no standard reusable knowledge exists. This requirement is

solved through the Standard Innovation slice.

The Standard Innovation based on the work to the TRIZ approach (Mann

2001) and the analogies on the pyramiding approach (Poetz and Prügl 2014). If

a problem cannot be solved through existing standard knowledge from the

Standard Catalog, it is necessary to transfer the problem to another industry: If


10

solutions for the abstract same problem exist, it can be reused. The

methodology of the problem of abstraction in step one, the search for solutions

at an abstract level in step two and the final solution to transfer their own

specific level is part of the TRIZ approach. While abstract problem-solution

mappings are done by pattern search in patents in the TRIZ approach, in the

pyramid approach of Poetz and Prügl (2014) interviewing of experts in analog

domain are used to achieve this goal.

To summarize, the slice of the Standard Innovation forms a synthesis of

the TRIZ and the Pyramid Approach. The basis is the finding of abstract

problem for a concrete problem, then the search for solutions at an abstract

level by domain analogies and in the last step the transfer of the abstract

solution to the specific domain level. The practical implementation can be

reached in following iterations:

1. The transfer of knowledge through expert knowledge and human

communication.

2. IT-supported standard knowledge storing of various domains and

human interpretation.

3. IT-based knowledge storage and sophisticated machine connecting of

problem issues of different domains (e.g. Schacht 2014).

Standard catalog and Standard Innovation form the basis of the approach

of the Standardized Individual Output Development, be modeled as a synthesis

of different theoretical and practical approaches in the SIC and form the basis

for the transformation of the synthesis cubes into a concrete IT-supported

analysis cube for automated Standardized Individual Output Development

(Fahsel and Schleifer 2015). Specific design of Standardized Individual Output

Development in the case of requirements engineering at the Institute for Book

Studies is the subject of the following Case Study.

Case Study

The design of the Standardized Individual Output Development using

Linguistic knowledge standards is subject of the following described case

study investigation.

Case Study Investigation

A case study analysis is concretized in definition of research subject and

research questions, implementation design and subsequent execution.

Research subject of the contribution is the Standardized Individual Output

Development in general and in particular the consideration of cultural problems

in requirements analysis and their solution on linguistic approaches. Research

objectives of contributing were on the one hand in the processing problems in

requirements engineering and the conceptual preparation of the Standardized

Individual Output Development, and on the other hand the empirical


11

investigation. The empirical investigation of this proposed approach is based

on the research method of case study with the following design (Yin 2013):

Objective: The research subject of the Standardized Individual Output

Development in the Publishing Industry is a relatively unexplored area

of research, so there is a theory-building output in focus. With regard to

the research purpose a phenomenal research interest will be at the

focus.

Object Selection: With regard to the target position, the individual

output development under consideration of linguistic approaches to

solving cultural problems in requirements analysis, two projects at the

institute for book studies are considered in terms of a holistic multi-case

study.

Data Collection: Why and how questions are a key part of the study.

For that reason the collected data are more qualitative than quantitative.

In addition by participant observation the study includes interviews and

content analysis to ensure the quality of the collected data.

Evaluation: The case studies will first individually and the following

step analyzed across. The individual evaluation is preceded by a short

project presentation, and then the particular standard used is analyzed.

The standards used with regard to the theory of individual output on the

one hand and the linguistic contribution to the solution of cultural differences

on the other hand were considered in the last step.

Case – “Template Approach”

The project group had the task to convert the annual report of Erlangen

Institute for Book Studies into an online version so that a reader individual

configuration of individual semantic units can be accessed. As a result, the

individual requirement of the individual reader configuration via an extension

of the WordPress CMS was achieved through selected plugins. The individual

output, the reader individual configurations of individual semantic units, was

achieved through a solution-neutral documentation of requirements on the

Template Approach as a basis for subsequent derived analysis of solution

variants and final technical implementation (Fahsel and Schleifer 2015). In the

approach of Individual Standardized Development the used Template

Approach is carried out both as input (standard) and output (individual output).

First, the Template Approach is investigated as a standard (input). Here the

following question is in the focus of analysis: What specific problem occurred

in the output development within the project and how was the Template

Approach standard used for the output development?

The concrete challenge was the correct and full documentation of

customer requirements. A problem field for which no standards in the book

science exist and thus the students were unable to access a domain-specific

knowledge catalog. Alternatively, the possibility remains of the SIC- technique

of Standard Innovation across domains analogies. There is the possibility of an


12

expert survey regarding standards of analog domain or the problem solution by

an IT System. In the project the expert survey was used. Following the TRIZ

approach the specific problem of the project was abstracted whereby it became

associated with the domain of Software Industry and here the requirements

engineering (Mann 2001). In the context of software and system development,

the challenge of collecting customer requirements on a semiformal language is

solved by the Template Approach, which leads to structured requirements, as

formalized input for the following steps of design and implementation (Rupp et

al. 2009). After finding the standard knowledge in the form of templates that

approach was used in the project and ensure on the one hand the completeness

of the requirements on the use of rules and on the other hand, the structured

requirements definition via templates. A significant contribution to the project's

success – only what is correct formulated leads to a system that is doing the

right things (Requirement Responsibility) and doing the things right

(Construction Responsibility). Figure 5 illustrates the elements of a template

and shows a concrete template instance of the project.

Figure 5. Structure and Application of Template Approach

With regard to the consideration of the Template Approach as an

individual output the already mentioned regulations for complete requirements

analysis will be explained. The semiformal natural language requirement

description Template Approach consists of two components: a syntactic part –

the already presented templates and a semantic part – the rules and the

Glossary. Here the template is the concrete result. The transition as the way

from customers (unspeakable) needs to persisted requirements documentation

with templates are done among others by standardized rules (Rupp et al. 2009)

which systematically eliminate losses through representation transformation

through language. Cause of transformation losses forms in simple terms the

difference between “what is thought” (deep structure) and “what is said”

(surface structure) (Chomsky 1968). Figure 6 visualizes the problem.


13

Figure 6. Transformation Model as the UML Use Case Diagram

Transformational Grammar

Surface Structure

Filter

Deep Structure

Culture Socialization

This distinction between deep structure and surface structure is caused

among others by cultural differences and can be systematized in Deletion,

Generalization and Distortion (Rupp et al. 2009; Chomsky 1968). This raises

the question as to remedy this faulty retranslation of Derivation (Chomsky

1968) and in the specific case the understanding of the original “internal” but

not completely outspoken customer need. Initially, there was no solution in the

domain of the IT Industry. Via a standard innovation of approaches of

Chomsky (1968) for the differentiation of deep and surface structure, the

application of the standard knowledge of transformational grammar of

Chomsky in Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP) of Bandler and Grinder

(1982), a standard composition was bundled in an individual output for

semiformal requirement method, the template approach.

In summary, the individual requirement of the project has been transferred

to individual output, among others through a Standard Innovation of the

template approach from Software to Publishing Industry. The template

approach itself is to be interpreted as an individual output from different

knowledge standards in the linguistic environment, as shown in the Figure 7.


14

Figure 7. Individual Project Output as a Component of Individual Output

Composites


Surface Structure

Filter

Deep Structure


Solution-Linguistics-NLP

Surface StructureSIC-Transformational

GrammarRequirement NLPDevelopment

Requirement fault SIC-NLPRequirement Template ApproachDevelopment

Customer Needs SIC-TemplateRequirement Project ImplementationDevelopment

Solution-Template-Project Implementation

Solution-Template Approach

Case – “Holistic Approach”

Currently a variety of communication methods, natural and artificial

languages for the concept definition are used in a large German authority.

Challenges consist in: (1) the effort of creating different concepts, (2) risks

associated with the transformation of information into different concepts and

(3) the traceability between the concepts due to various languages.

Therefore, an objective is to develop a holistic language for creating

business concepts. The holistic approach should provide a common language

for all participants. The basics of the holistic concept were first presented in

2013 at the chair for Software Engineering by Jörn Fahsel and Raphael Dudek

(2013). In this context the project addresses the question to which solutions for

holistic concept descriptions exist, and then based on this to evaluate the

approach of Fahsel and Dudek (2013) and finally uses the won cognitions to

expand the approach.

The holistic approach tries to solve the challenges of demand for natural

language formulation by the departments and a semiformal communication in

the technical context. Hereby the problem exists by transformation of concepts,


15

which on the one hand causes an increased expenditure of time the other hand,

transformations inherent leads to loss of information (discussed in Fahsel

2003). This raises the question of solving the problem; in the terminus of the

SIC an output requirement for a holistic approach.

As no Standards in the Publishing Industry exits a standard knowledge of

other domains must be used. A contribution to the output development of a

holistic approach provides the template approach. By its natural language

character this is more reflecting the culture of departments and less of technical

experts which prefer semiformal or formal description. In the technical

environment Unified Modelling Language (UML) is used as a communication

standard. One possible approach provides the link between template set as the

language of the department with understandable and simplified diagram

characteristics of UML.

Following Wittgenstein statement – “the limits of my (cultural) languages

are the limits of my world” is to ask to what extent the idea of a holistic

concept has been fully penetrated. The designer is limited to its (language)

design (Wittgenstein 1922). How is this dilemma solved? Transferred to the

SIC, the question arises for a standard for this requirement. The maieutic is a

process standard of ancient Greek civilization that was used here. “I know that

I know nothing” as a basic attitude, to help the respondents in the genesis and

open up the questioner at best to new knowledge and help him to put his

constructions in question (Lütjen 2013). Based on the fundamentals of maieutic

a depth interview with project participants was carried out and as a result the

“world” of the holistic concept has been expanded as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Identified Features of a Holistic Concept

In summary, the approach of Standardized Individual Output was

investigated in relation to the use of linguistic standards to resolve cultural

differences in the requirements analysis in the case studies. On the one hand,

the approach of the Standardized Individual Output Development has proven to

be more stable framework for description of phenomena; on the other hand the


16

innovation output by use of linguistics approaches were identified. The result

of the cross case synthesis is described in Figure 9.

Figure 9. SIC as an Instance of the Composite Pattern

Pattern Instance - SIC

Composite-Pattern Composite

Component

SIC

SIC-Hermeneutical Spiral

«uses»


Surface Structure

Filter

Deep Structure


Solution-Linguistics-NLP

Surface StructureSIC-Transformational

GrammarRequirement NLPDevelopment

Requirement fault SIC-NLPRequirement Template ApproachDevelopment

Solution-Project Implementation-Lingua Franca

Customer Needs SIC-TemplateRequirement Project ImplementationDevelopment

Solution-Template-Project Implementation

Project Implementation SIC-Template-UMLRequirement Holistic ConceptDevelopment

Solution-Template Approach

Finally the Standardized Individual Output Development can be

interpreted itself as an individual output of the composite pattern whose

transition to a standard depends in using of the approach in different contexts.


17

Learning and Outlook

The case study shows the application of the Standardized Individual

Output Development to solve the problem of cultural differences in

requirements engineering. Cultural differences within national, organizational

or professional cultural aspects can thus lead to incorrect requirement

descriptions and form in interpretation of the Standardized Individual Output

Development the output requirement. The Template approach and holistic

approach form individual output to solve the culturally conditioned

communication deficits.

Both, the template approach and the holistic concept approach, are

interpreted as compositions whose development based on the use of linguistic

standard blocks among others NLP, transformational grammar or Maieutic. In

summary the empirical investigation supports the approach of Standardized

Individual Output Development on Standard Catalogs and Standard

Innovation in general, and the sustainability of linguistics as a standard

building block supplier to the Standardized Individual Output Development in

particular. The outlook on current research projects of the cultural challenges

in requirements engineering theory on the one hand and the use of SIC for an

institution independent education on the other hand forms the conclusion of the

contribution.

As shown in the article, (Inter)Cultural aspects play an important role in

requirements engineering, on the one hand in practical application but also in

teaching. Investigations in this context are rather underrepresented in the

research. Derived from that requirement a first draft for a collaborative

research project was created (Herrmann et al. 2014) and will be expanded to an

international research project in the next step about gaining of international

project partners. As a technical platform for the collaborative creation of

scientific papers in the project the online based authoring system of the

cooperation partner Appsoft from Munich can be used for free. The authoring

system Xeditor is shown in Figure 10.


18

Figure 10. Authoring Tool – Collaborative and Online-Based Editor

Sustainable Education as the foundation for a sustainable development of a

people, the economy and the environment forms the second outlook. In the

interpretation of education as a fundamental right (Nussbaum 2011; Rawls

1971), the challenge is a global, high-quality, local and individual customized

education (Aubert et al. 2015). In particular, for Third World countries a

problem: Here is a great demand for education, but the supply of well-trained

teachers is difficult (UNESCO 2014). According to a study by UNESCO

(Aubert et al. 2015) two million new teachers would be needed only to ensure

primary education. Solution offers Innovations of Information Communication

and Technology (ICT). New and enriching possibilities to improve education

and ICT in particular have been discussed by mobile devices, networking, and

digital services. Experiences in South Africa with separation of education and

organization through mobile devices and digital services demonstrate the

potential for a more equitable distribution of education worldwide (Aubert et

al. 2015). This is where a current contribution relates to: The stress field of

qualitative, global and sustainable education should be solved by an institution-

independent education via digital and networked media, e.g. Big Data Learning

and Adaptive Books (Razek and Mohdyan 2013; Swertz et al. 2013) or Book

slicing (Baumgartner et al. 2004). Theoretical brace around this outlook

constitutes the theoretical approach of Standardized Individual Development

(Fahsel and Schleifer 2015). On the one hand to model the relationship

between capabilities and then bundling and also new bundling them to

functions (Paul and Lopez 2001). On the other hand, as a framework for

systematizing reuse standards to create new learning opportunities. In the

specific case of digital written media based individual services in support of

sustainable education.


19

References

Aubert, A., Daiglepierre, R., Le Quentrec, E., Pedró, F., Loiret, P.-J. (2015). Digital

Services for Education in Africa. Savoirs communs n°17.

Baba, M. L. and Falkenburg D. R. (1996). “Technology management and American

culture. Implications for business process redesign”, Research Technology

Management 39(6): 44–55.

Bandler, R., Grinder, J., Andreas, S. (1982). Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the

Transformation of Meaning. Moab.

Baumgartner, P., Furbach, U., Groß-Hardt, M., Sinner, A. (2004). Living Book –

Deduction, Slicing, and Interaction. Journal of Automated Reasoning 32: 259–

286.

Bond, M. (1988). “Finding Unusual Dimensions of Individual Variation in

multi‐Cultural Studies of Values: the Rokeach and Chinese Value Surveys”,

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55: 1009–1015.

Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt.

Fahsel, J. (2003). Möglichkeiten der Transformation von Klassendiagrammen in ER-

Diagrammen – Zusammenhänge von objektorientierten Modellen und

Datenmodellen [Ways of transformation of class diagrams into ER diagrams –

relationships of object-oriented models and data models] (Diploma Thesis).

Chemnitz University of Technology.

Fahsel, J., Abert, C. Delling, F., Köstler, K., Menten, S., Kraus, V. (2014).

Standardisierte Individualentwicklung: Vom Jahresbericht der Buchwissenschaft

Erlangen zum Crossmedialen Workflow [Standardized Individual Development:

From the annual report of the Institute for Book Studies Erlangen to a cross-

media workflow]. Präsentation auf der Frankfurter Buchmesse. Frankfurt.

Fahsel, J., Dudek, R. (2013). Holistische Modelle: Ansätze zur ganzheitlichen

Modellierung [Holistic models: approaches to holistic modeling]. Vortrag auf

dem Kolloquium am Lehrstuhl Software Engineering (Leitung: Prof. Dr.

Francesca Saglietti), Universität Erlangen, 13.12.2013.

Fahsel, J., Schleifer, I. (2015). Standardisierte Individualentwicklung: Vom

Printprodukt zum Individuellen Content [Standardized Individual Development:

From print product to individual content]. Präsentation auf der Leipziger

Buchmesse. Leipzig.

Fettke, P., Loos, P. (2002). Der Referenzmodellkatalog als Instrument des

Wissensmanagement: Methodik und Anwendung [The reference model catalog

as a tool of knowledge management: methods and application]. In: Becker, J.

(Ed.): Wissensmanagement mit Referenzmodellen: Konzepte für die

Anwendungssystem- und Organisationsgestaltung [Knowledge management with

reference models: concepts for the development and organizational design].

Heidelberg. pp. 3–22.

Göpfert, I. (2012). Logistics for the Future. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Hall, P. (2005). “Interprofessional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers”,

Journal of Interprofessional Care, Supplement 1: 188–196.

Hall, P. and Weaver L. (2001) “Interdisciplinary education and teamwork: A long and

winding road”. Medical Education 35: 867–875.

Herkenhoff, L. (2010). “Professional Culture, Emotional Intelligence and the

Emotional Process Model”, The Journal of Organizational Leadership & Business .

URL: http://goo.gl/fQvwqj [accessed 13.05.2015]


20

Herrmann, A., Hoffmann, A. and Weißbach, R. (2014). Research on Intercultural

Teaching for RE. Proposal for a Multi Case Study. In: Penzenstadler, B; Gregory,

S.; Landes, D. (eds.): REET 2014. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop

on Requirements Engineering Education & Training co-located with 22nd

International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE2014), pp. 35–39.

URL: http://goo.gl/o55A34 [accessed 29.05.2015].

Hofstede, G. (2014). “Culture”, URL: http://goo.gl/MSAHZg [accessed 13.05.2015].

Hofstede, G. (1980). “Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work

Related Values”, Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences – Comparing Values, Behaviors,

Institutions, and Organizations across nations, 2nd edition, Sage Publications.

Lasi, H., Kemper, H.-G., Fettke, P., Feld, T., Hoffmann, M. (2014). Industrie 4.0. In:

Wirtschaftsinformatik 56(4): 261–264.

Leidner, D. E. and Keyworth, T. (2006). “A review of culture in information systems

research. Toward a theory of information technology culture. conflict”,

Management Information Systems Quarterly 30(2): 357–399.

Lütjen, J. (2013). Das Bildungswegmodell zur Rehabilitation der sokratischen

Mäeutik – Pädagogische und therapeutische Transformationsarbeit. Eine

hermeneutische Studie [The educational model for the rehabilitation of the

Socratic maieutic – Educational and therapeutic transformation work. A

hermeneutical study]. Hamburg.

Mann, D. (2001). An introduction to TRIZ: The theory of inventive problem solving.

Creativity and Innovation Management 10(2): 123–125.

Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach.

Cambridge.

Overhage, S., Skroch, O. and Turowski, K. (2010). Eine Methode zur Bewertung der

Eignung von Anforderungsspezifikationen für Offshoring-Projekte [A Method to

Evaluate the Suitability of Requirements Specifications for Offshore Projects].


Paul, A. D., Lopez, J. (2001). Knowledge, Capabilities and Human Capital in

Economic Growth. New Zealand Treasury Working Paper 01/13.

Piller, F. T. (2001). Mass Customization. Ein wettbewerbsstrategisches Konzept im

Informationszeitalter [Mass Customization. A competitive strategic concept in the

information age]. Wiesbaden.

Poetz, M., Prügl, R. (2014). Find the Right Expert for Any Problem. URL:

https://hbr.org/2014/12/find-the-right-expert-for-any-problem! [accessed

20.02.2015]

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge.

Razek, M. A., Modyan, A. El (2013). Towards an Adaptive eBook. Riyadh.

Rupp, C., and die Sophisten (2009). Requirements-Engineering und -Management.

Professionelle, iterative Anforderungsanalyse für die Praxis [Requirements-

Engineering and -Management. Professional, iterative analysis of requirements

for the practice]. 5. Auflage. München, Wien.

Schacht, M. (2014). Nutzen semantischer Technologien in der Normung und

Anwendung [Benefits of semantic technologies in the standardization and

application]. DIN-Mitteilungen 10: 6–11.

Schein, E. H. (1984). “Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture”, Sloan

Management Review 25(2): 3.

Schacht, M., Hertel, L. (2009). Notwendigkeit und Nutzen von Normeninformationen

in Geschäftsprozessen [Importance and use of standards in business processes].

DIN-Mitteilungen Juli: 24–30.

Scheer, A. W. (1999). ARIS – Business Process Frameworks. Heidelberg.


21

Stein, J. and Herrmann, A. (2013). “The Origin of Cultural Barriers in Distributed

Software Development”, DASMA Software Metrik Kongress, pp.143-159.

Swertz, C., Swertz, C., Schmölz, A., Forstner, A., Heberle, F., Henning, P. A.,

Streicher, A., ... & Zander, S. (2013). A Pedagogical Ontology as a Playground in

Adaptive Elearning Environments. In: Horbach, M. (Hrsg.), INFORMATIK 2013

Informatik angepasst an Mensch, Organisation und Umwelt [Lecture Notes in

Informatics Bd 220], Bonn 2013, pp. 1955–1960. URL: http://homepage.uni

vie.ac.at/christian.swertz/texte/2013_09_AST/2013_INTUITEL_FOR_AST2013

_v2.pdf [accessed 13.03.2015].

The Hofstede Center (2014). “Dimensions”. URL: http://geert-hofstede.com/organi

sational-culture-dimensions.html

UNESCO (2014). Shaping the Future We Want: UN Decade of Education for

Sustainable Development (2005-2014). Final Report. France.

van der Aalst, W. (2013). Process cubes: Slicing, dicing, rolling up and drilling down

event data for process mining. In: Song, M., Wynn, M. T., Liu, J. (eds.): Asia

Pacific Business Process Management. Lecture Notes in Business Information

Processing 159: 1–22.

vom Brocke, J., and Sinnl, T. (2011). „Culture in business process management. A

literature review”. Business Process Management Journal (BPMJ) 17(2): 357–

377.

von Stettn, A., Beimborn, D. and Weitzel, T. (2012). Auswirkungen kulturspezifischer

Verhaltensmuster auf das Sozialkapital in multinationalen IT-Projektteams

[Analyzing and Managing the Impact of Cultural Behaviour Patterns on Social

Capital in Multinational IT Project Teams – A Case Study Approach],


Watzlawick, P,Weakland, J. H. and Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem

formation and problem resolution. Norton.

Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London. http://goo.gl/QW

s1x [accessed 15.03.2015].

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles: Sage

Publications.

http://geert-hofstede.com/organisational-culture-dimensions.html

http://geert-hofstede.com/organisational-culture-dimensions.html

Documents

ATINER's Conference Paper Series LNG2015-1816 · ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: LNG2015-1816 6 down between groups, the same holds true for professional culture.” (Herkenhoff