![](bg8.png)
canvas is a helpful tool to describe decisions. It makes
the characteristics of a decision explicit and thus pro-
vides a sound basis for discussions. The GRADE de-
cision canvas supports the discussion around a deci-
sion, but it is insufficient to describe a decision with-
out a consensus discussions. In other words, the
GRADE canvas is primarily a facilitator for discus-
sions around a decision. Thus, the GRADE decision
canvas can be used to illustrate in a comprehensive
and structured way decision scenarios even from dif-
ferent individuals. It can serve as a common vocab-
ulary and basis to capture, understand and communi-
cate decisions, as well as reflect on decision-making.
One important limitation of the canvas is the diffi-
culty to effectively visualize the relations between the
elements describing a decision and even the relations
between different decisions. This makes it difficult to
carry out trade-off and impact analysis of the options
within a decision. We are currently investigating pos-
sible ways to overcome this issue and thereby making
those analyses possible for the GRADE canvas.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work is partially supported by a research grant
for the ORION project (reference number 20140218)
from The Knowledge Foundation in Sweden.
REFERENCES
Badampudi, D., Wohlin, C., and Petersen, K. (2016). Soft-
ware component decision-making: In-house, OSS,
COTS or outsourcing - A systematic literature review.
Journal of Systems and Software, 121:105–124.
Herrmann, T., Jahnke, I., and Loser, K.-U. (2004). The role
concept as a basis for designing community systems.
In COOP, pages 163–178.
Li, J., Bjørnson, F. O., Conradi, R., and Kampenes, V. B.
(2006a). An empirical study of variations in cots-
based software development processes in the norwe-
gian it industry. Empirical Software Engineering,
11(3):433–461.
Li, J., Conradi, R., Slyngstad, O. P. N., Bunse, C., Torchi-
ano, M., and Morisio, M. (2006b). An empirical study
on decision making in off-the-shelf component-based
development. In Proceedings of the 28th international
conference on Software engineering, pages 897–900.
ACM.
Manteuffel, C., Tofan, D., Avgeriou, P., Koziolek, H., and
Goldschmidt, T. (2016). Decision architect a decision
documentation tool for industry. Journal of Systems
and Software, 112:181 – 198.
McCormick, W., Lyons, N., and Hutcheson, K. (1992).
Distributional properties of jaccards index of similar-
ity. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Meth-
ods, 21(1):51–68.
Morisset, C., Yevseyeva, I., Groß, T., and van Moorsel, A.
(2014). A formal model for soft enforcement: influ-
encing the decision-maker. In Security and Trust Man-
agement, pages 113–128. Springer.
Papatheocharous, E., Petersen, K., Cicchetti, A., Sentilles,
S., Shah, S. M. A., and Gorschek, T. (2015). Decision
support for choosing architectural assets in the devel-
opment of software-intensive systems: The grade tax-
onomy. In Proceedings of the 2015 European Con-
ference on Software Architecture Workshops, page 48.
ACM.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., and Chat-
terjee, S. (2007). A design science research method-
ology for information systems research. Journal of
management information systems, 24(3):45–77.
Petersen, K., Badampudi, D., Shah, S., Wnuk, K.,
Gorschek, T., Papatheocharous, E., Axelsson, J., Sen-
tilles, S., Crnkovic, I., and Cicchetti, A. (2017).
Choosing component origins for software intensive
systems: In-house, cots, oss or outsourcing?–a case
survey. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.
Tan, J. K. and Sheps, S. B. (1998). Health decision support
systems. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Tang, A., Tran, M. H., Han, J., and Van Vliet, H. (2008).
Design reasoning improves software design quality. In
International Conference on the Quality of Software
Architectures, pages 28–42. Springer.
Tyree, J. and Akerman, A. (2005). Architecture decisions:
Demystifying architecture. IEEE software, 22(2):19–
27.
Van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., and Hilliard, R. (2012a). A
documentation framework for architecture decisions.
Journal of Systems and Software, 85(4):795–820.
Van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., and Hilliard, R. (2012b).
Forces on architecture decisions-a viewpoint. In Soft-
ware Architecture (WICSA) and European Conference
on Software Architecture (ECSA), 2012 Joint Working
IEEE/IFIP Conference on, pages 101–110. IEEE.
Van Vliet, H. and Tang, A. (2016). Decision making in soft-
ware architecture. Journal of Systems and Software,
117:638–644.
ENASE 2017 - 12th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering
194