FFMII IntroductionJuha Tiihonen

Refer to FFMII Specification for details and explanations

1

Field Work

– Field Work refers to work that is expected to be conducted by individual (or group of closely co-operating individuals) without need for strong supervisory guidance. Field Work is modeled as Tasks composed of Activities and Steps.

Field Force

– Field Force refers to a group of Assignees (=persons to whom tasks are assigned to) to whom Work Requests are delivered using FFMII interface

FFMS

– Field Force Management System (FFMS) refers to one or more software components collectively responsible for efficient communication with the Field Force

ERMS

– Enterprise Resource Management System (ERMS) refers to one or more software components collectively responsible for assignment of Resources into company business operations, including work planning, execution and exception handling phases

• E.g. SAP

Basic FFMII terminology

2

Field Force Management Integration Interface

3

. . .

FFMII

Enterprise Resources Management

Operational Analytics & Reporting

Supervision Scheduling

Field-Force Management User Profile Mgmt

Field Communication Terminal Mgmt

Field-Force

Material Information

Partner Data

People Data

Higher-order system (optional)

Customer Data

. . .

Map Services

BI

Site Knowledge Database

Rossum, NSN, ClickSoftware Technologies, Aalto, Newelo, Pajat Management

FFMII provides a flexible interface between ERMS and FFMS for the purpose of work request modeling, exchange, and collection of data from the field. Information carried with work requests, work request structure (work-flow) and data to be collected can all be defined dynamically ‘as data’. This data driven architecture makes FFMII very flexible and adaptable to numerous industries

• Simple topology: a single Manager and a single Implementation interacting

• Distributed work realization: A single Manager interacting with several Implementations for communicating with distinct groups of field personnel

• Shared Field Force: multiple Managers interacting with a single Implementation

• Multi-Paradigm: multiple Managers interacting with a single Implementation

Flexible integration topologies

4

Manager

Implementation

Manager

Multi-paradigm integration topology (example)

ImplementationImplementation

Shared field force

Distributedwork

realization

Domain Model (main topics of FFMII )

Work Type SpecificationWork Type

Specification

FFMII Domain Model

Work Request Status RecordWork Request Status Record

Work Request

Work Request

Reference DataReference Data

AssigneeAssignee ScheduleSchedule

Field Initiated Request

Field Initiated Request

Task

Activity

Step

StateData FormData Form

Dependency

Action

Topical Notification

Topical Inquiry

Work Request Status Change Notification

Domain model with more details

6

1

Task

0..*

Manager

Work Request

Activity

Step

1..*

represents

Work Type Specification

Action

Assignee

Schedule

0..*

leads to

1

1 1

1

0..*

0..*

1

0..1

1

Field Force

Implementation

Field Work

manages 1..*

1

0..*

1

<<interface>> FFMII

Location

0..1

1..*

0..*

describes structure

of

1

1..*

1..* 1..*

1..*

assigns works to

makes tasks accessible to

1..*

1

0..*

1 starts with

Work Request Status Record

Task Status Record

Activity History Entry

1 0..*

1

Manager produces series of self-contained Work Requests representing Tasks related to Field Works. Each Task is to be performed by one or more Assignees belonging to the addressable Field Force. A Manager communicates with one or more Implementations over the FFMII interface to make the planned Tasks accessible to corresponding Assignees.

Work type Specification structure

7

1

Activity Specification

Work Type

Specification Data Form Specification

Header

Work Overview

Work Instructions 0..1

1

1

0..1

Activity

Step

Location Data

1..*

1..*

Action Input Form

Step Instructions

Action

0..1

0..1

State

1..*

1

leads to

0..*

1

1..*

declares

0..*

1

Condition

0..1 +enable

Condition

+enable Condition

0..1

Status Category

Status Indicator

1

0..1

A Work Type Specification (WTS) describes content and structure of a Work Request

Relationship of Steps, Actions and States within an Activity

8

1

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3 Step 4 Step 5

Step 6

Step 7

State: State A Status Category: <<Open>> Status Indicator: Dispatched

State B <<Active>> OnSite

Action: {push} Obtain-approval

State C <<Inactive>> x-Obtain-approval

Action: {pop} Resume

State E <<Closed>> Completed

A combination of States, Steps and Actions form an Activity State Model. FFMII interface does not prescribe or imply usage of any specific Activity State Model in order to remain neutral with respect to types of Task a Work Request may represent.

In this example, the OnSite state requires the Assignee to decide whether the Task may be fulfilled by repairing the customer's equipment, or whether it is necessary to replace the equipment with a new unit.

Therefore there are two possible actions leading from Step 2, and both of them are enabled so that the Assignee may select either of them (enabling conditions aren't visualized in this diagram). If the Assignee chooses the Replace action, the action leads to Step 4. In this example, replacement requires approval, so the dashed action transfers the task to an Inactive state, pushing the current State into the State Stack. At that point, the other action leading from Step 4 is not enabled, due to an enabling condition which depends on receiving the approval. Once the approval arrives, the next action pops the State Stack to return to the OnSite state.

Note: a more complete scenario would probably also include action that should lead from Step 5, for handling the case when approval is not granted, possibly leading to another State in the Closed category which reflects cancellation of the Work Request.

Example: Activity State Model with Dependencies

9

1

Activity 1

Example Activity State Model (with dependencies)

Task

<<Open>> Pending

<<Active>> Ongoing

<<Closed>> Completed

<<Inactive>> Suspended

New Travelling

to Site Resolving

Issue Completed

Suspended

> Start < > On site < > Ready <

> Suspend <

> Resume <

Activity

<<Status Category>>

State

Step

> Action <

Association of Action in context of specific Step

Transition to another Step

Activity 2

<<Open>> Pending

<<Active>> Ongoing

<<Closed>> Completed

Activity 3

<<Open>> Pending

<<Closed>> Completed

Dependency of Activity or Action on State of another Activity

Activities MAY have dependencies on other Activities being in specific States.Activity-Enabling dependencies and Action-Enabling dependencies are specified as Boolean expressions referred to as Conditions.

Activity 1 is not made available to the Assignee until Activity 3 is in “Completed” State.

Additionally, while at the “New” Step, Activity 1 won’t be allowed to proceed towards the next Step, “Traveling to Site”, unless Activity 2 is at any Step associated with the State “Ongoing”.

Data forms

10

1

WR instance data

1 0..*

Data Form Specification

Data Form Element

1..*

Element Specification

Element Specification Reference

1..*

Data Binding

Value

0..1

Data Field Spec

Data Attachment Spec

Data Group Spec

Data Matrix Spec

1..*

Work Request Data

Work History

Work Request

Updated WR Data

0..*

{ xor }

stored in

Data Forms are used to model dynamically specified structured information. Data Forms are used, for example, for the purpose of defining Work Request header, overview and instructions, Step level instructions and user input.

Work Request Status Record

11

1

1..*

Work Request

Task

Activity

Step

1..*

Action

1

1

0..1

Action Input Form

Task Status

Record

Data Change History Entry

0..*

Task Status

Activity State

1

*

Revision Number

Activity Instantiation Timestamp

*

1

1

Updated Data

Cause 1

1

1

Assignee-Id

0..1

Activity Change History Entry

0..1

Input Data Activity-Id

Step-Id

Action-Id

1

1

1

Assignee-Id 0..1

1 Change History Entry

+ Change Time + Resulting Revision

Work Request Status Record

Revision Timestamp

1

1..*

Work Request Status Record reflects state changes of Work Request after it has been received by the Implementation. An Implementation MUST maintain one Work Request Status Record per each Work Request

Reference Data

12

1

Implementation

0..* Custom

Repository

Reference Data Repository

System Repository

0..*

Reference Data Item

1

1

ID

Value Reference

1

0..*

maintains

<<strongly typed>>

Class Value << type-less>>

Dictionary Value <<strongly typed>>

Primitive Value

Note: Reference may also target items residing in different repository

1 0..1 0..*

Repository Descriptor

+ id

{ system repositories only }

An Implementation MAY provide means for the Manager to establish custom data repositories with arbitrary content “Reference Data” that MAY be used for input value selection, lookup of display values or content validation in Work Requests.An Implementation MAY also provide access to system repositories providing access to selected data on Implementation side, such as Assignee identities and alike.

Field-Initiated Request

13

1

Work Request

Field-Initiated Request

Topical Notification

Topical Inquiry

1

Request Data

Custom Topic

1

Standard Topic

0..*

1

FIR Template

Topic Assignee

1 0..1

FIR Specification

<< RDM Repository>> FIR Template

Repository

Data Form Specification

1

1

1 0..1

Request Form Response Form

0..1

0..*

WR processing Topics

Field-Initiated Request (FIR) is a request initiated by an Assignee and dispatched as a structured message from Implementation to Manager. It is intended for making requests or reporting information outside the usual Activity work flow, such as requesting activation or reset of a specific device, reporting absence of the Assignee, or requesting additional work for the Assignee.

Non-standard track Draft:

FFMII business drivers & use cases, and high level features requirements

Public 30-dat Review Draft. No comments!

Standard track draft:

Development mostly done

+significant cleanup

+machine-readable (SOAP)

+many details

Goal: Public Review Draft, February 2012

Aalto: Review and comment proposals– + provide content

Aalto: Provide (anonymous) business use case for machinery maintenance/repair

– Contributes to requirements for FFMII– A generic use case has been included– Seek for a concrete case to verify&expand

Status of FFMII (2011-12-16)

14

Existing material 12/2011, 8/2011