KB
In which context "is technically responsible for " connection type has to be used?.
Hi Karthikeyan,
This relationship, used for example between a role (e.g. Person Type symbol) and a process step (e.g. function symbol) or even an Application System Type symbol, as with all relationships, exists for analysis and/or reporting purposes. So, philosophically, you don't 'have' to use any given relationship. Typically, at the beginning of any modeling effort, you would need to work with the project team and determine what modeling conventions are required for your specific project, relationships included. So, you need to ask a question something like "what terms/words do we use when describing the relationship between a 'role' and a 'process step?' A common answer would be that a role 'carries out' (or executes) a process step, and you would then include this in your method filter. In a nutshell, if you have to ask a question similar to the one you've posed here : 'when do I use the 'is technically responsible for' relationship?' the short answer is that you most likely don't need to include it in your method filter initially as it has little meaning to anyone at this point. In fact, it may only serve to confuse. Each relationship should be analyzed in this fashion in the beginning. As the project team becomes more savvy about process modeling, it may become necessary to include more relationships into the method filter. As a best practice, I only include in the method filter what is required by the goal of the modeling effort/project.
Just my humble opinion.....
Best Regards,
Bob
