Alternativas a los procesos para la obtención de gas de síntesis

In the preceding chapters, sketchy and disjoint models had been developed as building blocks of the conceptual framework and broad categorisations of its workings. In this chapter, the three threads of the research (case study review, case studies and survey) are drawn together to form the main framework and associated categorisations. References to each of the constituent elements are developed and an appraisal of the framework is made.

8.1 Introduction

The overall model assimilates three characteristics from the research described in this thesis, these being:

• The assumption that major determinants can be identified and the links between those determinants defined.

• That initial categorisations, some based on existing research, can be developed to illustrate the instances and behaviours of the major determinants.

• That each major determinant or primary entity exerts a certain level of influence or deterministic behaviour over the contents of connected primary entities and that the extent of such influences can be categorised^

The third element, although raised as a side issue in Chapter 5, will be outlined in more detail in this chapter. The issue of emergent behaviours in the manner in which system development strategies can fluctuate over the lifetime of a project is an issue that Land’s (1989) categorisation doesn’t take account of; his model supports four different types of system development strategy, and a project is expected to show evidence of having the characteristics of one distinct strategy over a project lifetime. Inherent to this model is the assumption that a development strategy, if ignoring short term fluctuations, is 'A categorisation of the degree of influence of one primary entity over another is considered to be

conceptually different to a weighting.

inherently stable. However, this research suggest that such assumptions are not necessarily correct, particularly when evidence points to gradual hardening of change control practices and subsequent dramatic changes in organisational communication. This issue will be discussed at length in section 8.2.4.

8.2 Structure of the Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework is presented in three different sections. The first section highlights the entire model, and illustrates the determinants operating between primary entities^. The second stage of the conceptual model is to break down primary entities into their component parts in order to illustrate the source and impacts of internal determinants. Not all primary entities need to be broken down in this way, strategy and methodology are elements whose internal behaviours have not been expanded. The reasons for breaking down other primary entities are primarily as a result of the analysis of survey data and also by comparisons between the data generated by each of the three research methods utilised.

The third and final level of the conceptual model are categorisations of the behaviours or states in each of the primary entities (or constituent components where relevant). The most important activity in this chapter is in explaining the behaviours of determinants, particularly in the manner in which some of them can fluctuate over the lifetime of a project. In order to do this, overviews of each primary entity are generated, details about each primary entity being split into the following sections:

• name of the entity;

• its behaviour (whether a particular entity will have the same categorisation over the lifetime of a project or could change categorisation when under influence from other determinants);

• the number of constituent components within that entity;

• the notes definitions resulting from both the review of case studies and the practical case studies carried out during this research which have influenced the definition of this entity and the categorisations of its behaviours;

^Which are labelled as secondary entities within this chapter.

• the elements of the survey which have contributed to the definition of this primary entity;

• a note of references for any categorisations which have resulting from research external to this study.

The textual description that follows these details defines what the primary entity is, and describes some of its internal components, where appropriate. Secondary entities, in comparison, are described separately from the primary entities they join together. Like the primary entities, secondary entities are split into a number of sections; these being:

• name of the entity;

• the notes definitions resulting from both the review of case studies and the practical case studies carried out during this research which have influenced the definition of this entity;

• the elements of the survey which have contributed to the definition of this secondary entity.

Again, the behaviours of entities are described in greater detail in the textual description which follows. In addition, based on the survey results, a great many of the secondary entities are categorised as having one of the following influences on the primary entities they determine or change:

• weak: The survey results gave some indication of the secondary entities influence, and in combination with other determinants may be strong enough to effect a change; • strong: The survey results gave some indication of the secondary entities influence,

and may be strong enough, in itself, to effect a change;

• hypothesis: The determinant resulted from the interrogation of the survey results or directly from the case study findings.

Figure 8.1 illustrates the completed conceptual framework. The diagram shows that there are 5 primary entities, the contents of which are influenced by other primary entities and also have an influence on other primary entities. The agents of change are defined as the

16 secondary entities that have been labelled as connecting each of the primary entities together, the direction of the arrow indicating the primary entity being influenced.

Organisational Familiarity Organisation D ev elo p m en t Paradigm Organisational Constraints Initial Statement of Objectives Initial Focus Methodology Methodology Constraints Organisational Constraints Communication Needs --- ► Development Paradigm w Strategy Demands w 4— Initial Focus of Development Mutable Requirements Novelty of Requirements Impact o f Developer Experience

Inter-connectivity o f requirements Problem/Situation Strategy Strategy Constraints Development Needs Development Pressures

Figure 8.1: The Final Conceptual Framework

Of the five primary entities in the model, the strategy entity acts as the fulcrum for the entire framework, reacting to each of the other influences. The nature of the links between strategy and the other primary entities can be assessed as a grouping, depending on the other primary entity involved. A methodology will be factor in determining the process by which the goals of the strategy will be met. The links between strategy and organisation will determine the manner of communication used within a project. The link between strategy and development pressures concerns how the strategy will handle change and the likely through-put of change during the lifetime of a project. Finally, the single connection between initial statement of objectives and strategy will determine the likely approach to analysis tasks (whether they be collection of information or validation of existing information).

The possible outcomes of each of these influences are explored in the next section, which describes the primary entities.

8.3 Primary Entities

8.3.1 Organisation

The primary entity organisation refers to a body or collection of individuals to which the project carries meaning. The definition, as a whole, extends to cover both client and developer organisations - if the two are separate - although there are expectations for individual components, which will be discussed during the examination of Figure 8.2. The organisation entity is defined as having the following attributes:

• a number o f client groups^ some of which provide users to provide requirements and test the system, if there are users for the system being developed; others who provide software or administration support for the system, and other groups who, whilst not contributing directly to the development of the project, are impacted by the project, either directly or indirectly;

• a level o f capability in producing and providing information systems. This attribute refers exclusively to the development paradigm in operation;

• a level o f organisational experience. This refers to the cultural values of the organisation, how they are accumulated and preserved. Organisational norms, supported by quality assurance, development guidelines, and standards bodies are important elements of organisational experience in as far as that experience extends to the development of information systems;

• a context within which the information systems development takes place. The context for the systems development will largely determine the modes of communication used in negotiation between all interested parties to the project.

Table 8.1 summarises the characteristics and values for this component.