Error! Style not defined. A1
Appendix 1: Problem signals
The table on next page shows how the problem signal classification scheme was arrived at.
Initial observations and interviews resulted in the list of signals shown in the leftmost col- umn. These were aggregated into a list of problem signals, shown in the middle column.
Finally, the problem signals were allocated to a cell in the problem signal classification scheme, by assessing whether the problem was a project management, knowledge man- agement or partnership management issue, and by determining whether it was a general problem or specific to Japan, IT or R&D.
For the sake of completeness, the problem signal classification scheme (discussed in para- graph 2.2) has also been inserted below.
categories general 5 - 1 È region: Japan 3 - 4 È product: IT 1 - 0 È function: R&D 2 - 1 È mgt. theories
project mgt.
8 - 0 Æ
A1 project mgt general P1 Project goal ambitious - 1 P6 Sequential / parallel - 2 P11 No minutes of meetings - 3
A2 project mgt Japan
P8 Human oriented mgt. style – 3 P9 No project manager - 3 P10 consensus, decisions slow - 3
A3 project mgt IT
P7 No clear workflow - 2 A4 project mgt R&D P3 Unclear goal - 1
knowledge mgt.
2 - 3 Æ
A5 knowledge mgt general P5 MDF, CGU not understood P12 Insuff. dissemination knowl.
P17 language problems
A6 knowledge mgt Japan
P13 Staff unfamiliar data model A7 knowledge mgt IT A8 knowledge mgt R&D A15 Staff different backgrounds
partnership mgt.
1 - 3 Æ
A9 partnership mgt general A10 partnership mgt Japan P2 METI uninterested sponsor P14 Beyond 1 yr budget uncertain P21 Many partners involved
A11 partnership mgt IT A12 partnership mgt R&D P4 Double agenda
Figure A1: Problem signal classification scheme. The black numbers in the column and row headers indicate the number of controllable problems in that column or row; the number of uncontrollable problems are shown in gray. The numbers behind each of the problems in the project management row clarify how the three aggregated problems were arrived at: P1 and P3 were taken together in the
“unclear goal” problem; P6 and P7 were aggregated into “unclear workflow;” and P8, P9, P10 and P11 were grouped into “elusive organization.”
Figure A2 (overleaf): The aggregation of problem signals.
Defying Japan
A2
Error! Style not defined. A3
Appendix 2: IDEF0 model (version 1)
Below, the IDEF0 activity models of the Millennium Project are show in their first version.
It is this version that Naka-team members gave feedback on.
I1
O1
M2 M3 M4
O2 C1
M1
Run simulations
A5 Make
simulation tool
A4 Implement
data model
A3 Make data
model A2 Survey
relevant activities
A1
Simulation results Simulation tool
Information infrastructure Information infrastructure
Raw data Data model
Inventory of relevant activities
JCII staff Titech staff
IT Company GPM tool
Data modelling techniques Staff
MDF concept CGU concept
Titech staff JCII staff IDEF language
Japanese government requirements
Japanese government money
Make information infrastructure
A0
Raw data Information infrastructure
Simulation results Japanese government requirements
Japanese government money IT Company
Data modelling techniques Staff
Figure A3: top level diagram
Figure A4: second level diagram
Defying Japan A4
O1 C2
M2
M3 M1
C1 C3 C4
I1
I2
Make level 2 model
A23 Make level
1 model A22 Make level
0 model A21
Data model Abstracted data model
Raw data
Simulation results
Detailed data model Japanese government requirements
Titech staff JCII staff
IDEF language Inventory of relevant activities
MDF concept CGU concept
Figure A5: third level diagram: make data model
O1 I1
I2
C1
M1 M2 M3
Hold seminar
A212 Make draft
partial model
A211
Detailed data model Raw data
Simulation results
Draft partial data model Japanese government requirements
JCII staff Titech staff
IDEF language
