Domain-specific reasoning for method engineering based on Toulmin's argumentation theory

Abstract

Methods that address enterprise–wide representation and analysis must support the full range of stakeholder requirements from business strategy through to IT infrastructure. Often such methods present a formalism, such as process models, that are unrelated to the natural language used for justification, analysis and communication of designs. The problem to be solved is to provide a structured basis for closing this gap. This paper proposes an argumentative method engineering approach, derived from Toulmin's argumentation model, for expressing design decisions, their associated convictions, and stakeholder negotiation. In addition to representing the support for design decisions, the approach justifies these claims by referring to already established knowledge. The argumentative approach enables the sophisticated management and reuse of knowledge during the development and extension of methods. The approach is evaluated using a case study, in which a software development method was outsourced to contractors.