A number of initiatives are underway for digitalizing real estate transaction processes. Public and private sector bodies are working to automate information retrieval and processing of the financial, ordinance  and  fiscal aspects of such transactions. Other initiatives, such as ours,  are targeted toward helping  stakeholders directly involved in selling and buying  real estate. We present the results from a set of  group sessions, where the focus was on improving the presentation of salient information to sellers and buyers of property. Based on an earlier conceptualization of perceived  information difficulties, we   elicited user stories  for facilitating a better generation, provision and consumption of relevant information for the  residential real estate transaction process. A total of ten services were aggregated from the user stories. We then asked a set of stakeholders to rate the effect of the services on functional objectives; i.e., on how they will affect the transaction process.  We asked stakeholders at the managerial level to rate the functional objectives on strategic objectives. Combining the two sets of ratings, one obtains a rating of perceived benefit for the services, which can help in prioritzing which services to start developing first. In the outset, real estate transactions involve stakeholders with opposing interests. We conclude that multi-stakeholder group sessions can help generate services that serve these conflicting interests on a common ground. 

We develop a logic-based approach for designing simulation-based training scenarios. Our methodology embodies a concise definition of the scenario concept and integrates the notions of training goals, acceptable versus unacceptable actions and performance scoring. The approach applies classical artificial intelligence (AI) planning to extract coherent plays from a causal description of the training domain. The domain- and task-specific parts are defined in a high-level action description language AL. Generic causal and temporal logic is added when the causal theory is compiled into the underlying Answer Set Programming (ASP) language. The ASP representation is used to derive a scoring function that reflects the quality of a play or training session, based on a distinction of states and actions into green (acceptable) and red (unacceptable) ones. To that end, we add to the casual theory a set of norms that specify an initial assignment of colors. The ASP engine uses these norms as axioms and propagates colors by consulting the causal theory. We prove that any set of such norms constitutes a conservative extension of the underlying causal theory. With this work, we hope to lay the foundation for the development of design and analysis tools for exercise managers. We envision a software system that lets an exercise manager view all plays of a tentative scenario design, with expediency information and scores for each possible play. Our approach is applicable to any domain in which means-ends reasoning is pertinent. We illustrate the approach in the domain of crisis response and management.

Software project success is often characterized in terms of time, cost and scope – despite that delivering benefit is the main purpose of a project. In this paper, we explore 1) to what degree benefit considerations influence major project decisions, 2) to what degree a specific set of benefits management challenge are handled and influence major project decisions and 3) if there is any realization (over time) that benefit considerations should receive greater attention. We investigate influence in projects with four types of problem severity: completed projects with only minor problems, completed projects with major problems, projects that were disrupted but completed, and projects that were terminated before completion. We asked 45 software professionals to what degree time, cost, scope, benefit and benefit/cost, as well as benefits management challenges, influence major roject decisions. Our findings indicate that time, cost and scope have a significantly higher degree of influence on project decisions than benefit and benefit/cost. However, practitioners think that benefit and benefit/cost should have significantly more influence on decisions than cost. The benefits management challenges are found to have less influence in the more severe projects. We argue that giving benefits considerations a stronger voice in project decisions would be in line with the desire of practitioners and the prime objective of delivering benefit to stakeholders. We conclude that it is important to understand how to handle benefits management challenges at different stages of project life and that handling such challenges should be integrated with other prime drivers of project success.