Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By Eric C. Cosman
Keywords
Overview
A May 2016 ARC Insight, Defining the Automation Profession, described
that challenge in terms of the competencies and experience required for
success. That Insight also included observations on how these competencies
are evolving in the face of changing technology and how competency de-
scriptions are necessary due to different perceptions and the lack of
common definitions and expectations.
Defining Automation
The challenge begins with the apparently simple question; What is Auto-
mation? Anyone who has ever tried to answer this question for a
layperson knows that it is more difficult than it might seem, and usually
requires using analogies to things like home thermostats and automobile
cruise controls.
Most people have heard of the parable of the blind men and the elephant, in
which a group of blind men who have never come across an elephant be-
fore, describe it based on their sense of touch. The moral of the parable is
that we have a tendency to project our partial experiences as the whole
truth, and ignore other people's partial experiences.
Current Models
Over the years, several groups and committees have developed reference
models to address part of this challenge. Notable examples are those in the
Purdue Enterprise Reference Architecture (PERA), and derivative works
such as the ISA-95/IEC 62264 standards. Unfortunately, some of these ref-
1 http://www.dictionary.com/browse/automation
The ARC Collaborative Manufacturing Model (CMM) has been used for
several years as a tool to position specific functional elements along one of
three intersecting axes or dimensions, each
representing a specific lifecycle.
2 http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8107
While conceptual models such as these are helpful in describing the posi-
tioning of and relationships between major functions, effective portfolio
management requires additional models and approaches.
Specific Challenges
If the intent in defining automation is to determine which functional ele-
ments are within the scope of standards or solutions portfolios, we need
more specificity. A less conceptual approach could address several specific
challenges related to solution specification and system design.
Describing data flows The flow of data between functions is perhaps the
most important relationship that must be identified. All data must have a
specific source and destination.
Activity Models
Both the ANSI/ISA-88 (IEC 61512) and ANSI/ISA-95 (IEC 62264) standards
contain Activity Models that logically decompose the functional scope
into specific activities, each with a clear definition. While the two standards
may not be entirely consistent in their use of the activity model concept, the
basic concept is the same.
Describing the information flows between functions provides the means for
identifying dependencies that must be considered when replacing a specific
function.
Recommendations
Define functional scope for your situation Adapt the general approach
described here to develop the functional scope of automation that is
most appropriate for the particular situation based on input from all
stakeholders.
Use cases and case studies Identify and describe use cases and case
studies that illustrate the needs of a specific industry or situation. Pro-
vide these to standards groups to use to help validate their more
general models.
For further information or to provide feedback on this Insight, please contact your
account manager or the author at ecosman@arcweb.com. ARC Insights are pub-
lished and copyrighted by ARC Advisory Group. The information is proprietary to
ARC and no part may be reproduced without prior permission from ARC.