This is a follow on from UML Profile for Benefits Realisation Management – 1. In that post I described the basic UML profile I have created for modelling project benefits in line with Bradley and Ward & Daniels
Having started to apply the profile successfully, I wanted to extend it to model measures,
These were modelled by meta-classing Class
As can be seen from this diagram, I have added a number of tagged values (which are modelled as attributes in the UML profile) to cover off the typical data that needs to be captured in relation to a measure.
I wrote yesterday about using a general purpose UML modelling tool to create project Benefit Maps.
In that post I described using Enterprise Architect’s ability to create custom UML profiles to create the beginnings of a custom modelling language for project benefits management.
In this article I walk through the basics of that UML profile.
Classes
The first task was to model the core objects of the benefits model – Objectives, Benefits, Disbenefits, Business Changes and Enablers.
These are all modelled as stereotypes of the Requirement metaclass:
The more observant of you will have noticed that there is also an enumeration called BenefitvalueType. this, together with the attributes on the Benefit and Disbenefit classes create a tagged value named “Value Type” in the final model, constrained to the different Sigma Value Types.
The Sigma Value Types are used as a way of classifying benefits - this aids with the identification of measures, and also stimulates a conversation with stakeholders about missing benefits.
Relationships
The second part of the profile contains the relationships needed for the Benefits model. As I noted before, I have decided to use realisation and dependency links to model different aspects of the Benefits model. These are included in the profile by creating new classes of the same name that redefine the relevant metaclasses, thus picking up all the default behaviour.
The profile also includes a redefinition of Association, which I will use in the next part of the model, modelling Measures.
As always, I welcome comments!
I’ve just heard that I have passed my PRINCE2 Practitioner qualification, thanks to the excellent help of Pearce Mayfield.
I’ve been familiar with the PRINCE2 method for a number of years, and have certainly applied the principles to local methods, but have resisted getting into it too formally because of the bureaucratic nightmare I have seen many organisations make from it.
One of the best things I can say about the Pearce Mayfield training is that through it I have seen, by contrast, how to make PRINCE2 a living and breathing approach to delivering a project.
I’ve just heard that I have passed my PRINCE2 Practitioner qualification, thanks to the excellent help of Pearce Mayfield.
I’ve been “broadly familiar” with the PRINCE2 method for a number of years, but have resisted getting into it too deeply because of the bureaucratic nightmare I have seen many organisations make from it.
One of the best things I can say about the Pearce Mayfield training is that through it I have seen, by contrast, how to make PRINCE2 a living and breathing approach to delivering a project.
