I would really like to find a way to move the Map step further to the left.
Ideally I would like a process where we are iteratively filling in the map as we go, rather than competing it at the end.
But that iterative diagraming process has to enhance the process of Modeling Business Concepts with the subject matter expert, not distracting from it.
So again another part of the process that requires experimentation.
The Connections steps will most likely be renamed to Relationships.
I have a desire to not use the term relationships, as in my experience as soon as I say entities and relationships to a stakeholder, their eyes start to glaze over.
But as Juha pints out introducing the term Connections (or Associations) will take our semantic language int he book outside the language norm and so this needs to be a very conscious decision.
Maybe Concepts and Relationships will sound ok, time will tell.
I at least want to play around with this language and test it before we go back the term Relationships, but gut feel is we will end up with that term.
The Business Story and the Core Business events steps are probably duplicated.
I have used defining Core Business Events as a pattern for years. Juha hasn't, he tends to use Business Stories.
So for now we will define each step separately and then see if we can merge them to reduce duplication or if they both have value. The juice is worth the squeeze so to speak.
Indeed! I have basically moved directly from Story to Concepts, because I consider the business events to be concepts in their own right (ie. a "Sales Order" is a concept that is also clearly an event).
We have both agreed that we will use the term Concepts as the thing to describe things, rather than entities, dimensions etc.
Concepts and Relationships sounds right to me.
Something I find helps with choosing the right verb is checking if the reverse verb makes sense.
Good: Customer buys Product -> Product bought by Customer
Bad: Employee belongs to Department -> ???
That's a really good rule of thumb for verbs, Paul - thanks!
Similar to the pay as you go methodology I’ve been using over the years. Would love to share notes
http://www.juansequeda.com/blog/2019/10/24/a-pay-as-you-go-methodology-to-design-and-build-knowledge-graphs/
Let's discuss Juan!
I would really like to find a way to move the Map step further to the left.
Ideally I would like a process where we are iteratively filling in the map as we go, rather than competing it at the end.
But that iterative diagraming process has to enhance the process of Modeling Business Concepts with the subject matter expert, not distracting from it.
So again another part of the process that requires experimentation.
The Connections steps will most likely be renamed to Relationships.
I have a desire to not use the term relationships, as in my experience as soon as I say entities and relationships to a stakeholder, their eyes start to glaze over.
But as Juha pints out introducing the term Connections (or Associations) will take our semantic language int he book outside the language norm and so this needs to be a very conscious decision.
Maybe Concepts and Relationships will sound ok, time will tell.
I at least want to play around with this language and test it before we go back the term Relationships, but gut feel is we will end up with that term.
The Business Story and the Core Business events steps are probably duplicated.
I have used defining Core Business Events as a pattern for years. Juha hasn't, he tends to use Business Stories.
So for now we will define each step separately and then see if we can merge them to reduce duplication or if they both have value. The juice is worth the squeeze so to speak.
Indeed! I have basically moved directly from Story to Concepts, because I consider the business events to be concepts in their own right (ie. a "Sales Order" is a concept that is also clearly an event).
First thing is the name of the steps has the wrong noun vs verb structure for the process.
Instead of "Scope" it should probably say "Define the Scope".
But I like this page to be as minimal as possible. To pare it back to as few words as possible.
Its also funny how the human brain fills in the gaps, so do we need to change the language used for the headings?
Super excited for this