[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Resend with readable jpg: My takeway (while listening in toanother telecom)
Hi again Folks, Sorry you couldn't read the diagram I attached the first time. I didn't realise that until got back into my home office a few minutes ago. So none of what I said below could make much sense. The first time I saved in EA it did something screwy. I doubt my penchant for eliminating whitespace in filenames had anything to do with, but I left the diagram name alone this time and it worked. So now you can see what I came away with from today'smeeting. Cheers, Rex Hi Folks, I shouldn't say I'm not going to do something when my next task is to listen into another meeting (and a looooong one) where I don't have to participate much. So I have attached my takeaway from today's meeting for the Trust and Risk in Willingness diagram. If EA allows a bi-directional Association Class, I couldn't find out how to do it, however, in practice both Trust and Risk should go in both directions, or you can just think of the actors as swapping positions. However, in any case, I think we should make their definitions as close to identical as we can as opposite Association Classes. Now: Trust: Trust is an actor's private perception of the commitment another actor has to a goal together with an identifiable set of real world effects associated with that goal. Risk: Risk an an actor's private perception that another actor's actions will impede fulfillment of the first actor's objectives. At a minimum I think Risk should say that "Risk is an actor's private perception that another actor's action and other factors will impede fulfillment of the first actor's objectives. What I suggest: Trust is an actor's private perception that another actor's actions and other factors will aid fulfillment of the first actor's objectives. I added other factors because different external and internal factors may apply between Trust and Risk and are part of the assessment of how well another actor's action will effect attaining the Desired Real World Effect. I chose the Risk definition to make them identical just because it was shorter and more terse and commitment is, IMO just another factor, a big one, but just one of many. So, In light of both Ken's prior effort and Danny's I think we are at least getting honded down. Cheers, Rex -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-898-0670
Trust and Risk in Willingness.jpg
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]