Abstract
Requirement management represents one of the key process in the complex product life cycle because it is involved not only at the beginning, but also in the further phases where the definition of the technical specifications sometimes implicates requirements tradeoff due to conflicts. For this reason the role of RM tools and methodologies, that normally represents a stand-alone solution, has to change and to be more integrated in the Product Lifecycle Management platform. At present a real shared integrated RM solution doesn’t exist and for this reason it is necessary to provide a framework for supporting the customization of the available RM solutions for catching the real and specific company needs in this new collaborative scenario. For this reason this paper presents a methodical approach that incorporates user-centered design principles into the customization process of the tool. It permits to be adopted in each possible company scenario thanks to its ability to catch the company specific needs and further identifying the right features for the company. The proposed methodology puts the user, rather than the system, at the center of the process because the RM solution could be considered effective only if it is able to save time and money in the data management by users. Moreover, this tool assessment method can help organizations efficiently determine candidate tools, to understand what is important in that organization and to make a tool selection customized for their needs. The case study on Requirement Management tools as Part of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) Solution is presented.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akao, Y.: QFD: Past, present, and future. In: Paper presented at the International Symposium on QFD (1997)
Akao, Y., Mazur, G.H.: The leading edge in QFD: past, present and future. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 20(1), 20–35 (2003)
Alemanni, M., Alessia, G., Tornincasa, S., Vezzetti, E.: Key performance indicators for PLM benefits evaluation: the Alcatel Alenia Space case study. Comput. Ind. 59(8), 833–841 (2008). doi:10.1016/j.compind.2008.06.003
Alemanni, M., Destefanis, F., Vezzetti, E.: Model-based definition design in the product lifecycle management scenario. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 52(1–4), 1–14 (2011). doi:10.1007/s00170-010-2699-y
Berger, C., Blauth, R., Boger, D., Bolster, C., Burchill, G., DuMouchel, W., Shen, D.: Kano’s methods for understanding customer-defined quality. Cent. Qual. Manag. J. 2(4), 3–36 (1993)
Beyer, H.: Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. 1 edn, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, San Francisco, USA (1997)
Chaudha, A., Jain, R., Singh, A.R., Mishra, P.K.: Integration of Kano’s model into quality function deployment (QFD). Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 53(5–8), 689–698 (2011). doi:10.1007/s00170-010-2867-0
Fischer, X., Fadel, G., Ledoux, Y.: Interactive Product Design Research in Interactive Design, vol. 3. Springer, Paris (2011)
Gould, J.D., Boies, S.J., Lewis, C.: Making usable, useful, productivity-enhancing computer applications. Commun. ACM 34(1), 74–85 (1991)
Gould, J.D., Boies, S.J., Ukelson, J.: How to design usable systems. In: Handbook of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 2, pp. 231–254 (1988)
Griffin, A., Hauser, J.R.: The voice of the customer. Market. Sci. 12(1), 1–27 (1993)
Guerra, A. L., Gidel, T., Kendira, A., Vezzetti, E., Jones, A.: Co-evolution of design tactics and CSCWD systems: methodological circulation and the TATIN-PIC platform. In: Paper presented at the DS 75–9: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Design for Harmonies, vol. 9: Design Methods and Tools, Seoul, Korea, 19–22.08. 2013 (2013)
Haag, S., Raja, M.K., Schkade, L.L.: Quality function deployment usage in software development. Commun. ACM 39(1), 41–49 (1996). doi:10.1145/234173.234178
Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F., Tsuji, S.: Attractive quality and must-be quality. J. Jpn. Soc. Qual. Control 14(2), 39–48 (1984)
Karlsson, J.: Managing software requirements using quality function deployment. Softw. Q. J. 6(4), 311–326 (1997). doi:10.1023/A:1018580522999
Lamont, S.: Case study: Successful adoption of a user-centered design approach during the development of an interactive television application. In: Paper presented at the Anais do 1st European Interactive Television Conference, Brighton (2003)
Lau, H.Y.K., Mak, K.L., Lu, M.T.H.: A virtual design platform for interactive product design and visualization. J. Mater. Proc. Technol. 139(1–3), 402–407 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00510-7
Matzler, K., Hinterhuber, H.H.: How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano’s model of customer satisfaction into quality function deployment. Technovation 18(1), 25–38 (1998). doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(97)00072-2
Tan, K.C., Shen, X.X.: Integrating Kano’s model in the planning matrix of quality function deployment. Total Qual. Manag. 11(8), 1141–1151 (2000). doi:10.1080/095441200440395
Tontini, G.: Integrating the Kano model and QFD for designing new products. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 18(6), 599–612 (2007). doi:10.1080/14783360701349351
Vezzetti, E.: Product lifecycle data sharing and visualisation: web-based approaches. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 41(5–6), 613–630 (2009)
Vezzetti, E.: A knowledge reusing methodology in the product’s lifecycle scenario: a semantic approach. Int J manuf. Technol. Manag. 26(1), 149–160 (2012)
Vezzetti, E., Moos, S., Kretli, S.: A product lifecycle management methodology for supporting knowledge reuse in the consumer packaged goods domain. Comput. Aided Des. 43(12), 1902–1911 (2011)
Vezzetti, E., Violante, M.G., Marcolin, F.: A benchmarking framework for product lifecycle management (PLM) maturity models. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 71(5–8), 899–918 (2014)
Violante, M.G., Vezzetti, E.: A methodology for supporting requirement management tools (RMt) design in the PLM scenario: an user-based strategy. Comput. Ind. 65(7), 1065–1075 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.compind.2014.05.001
Wiegers, K.E.: Automating requirements management. Softw. Dev. 7(7), 1–5 (1999)
Web References
INCOSE: Tool Database Working Group (TDWG), INCOSE Requirements Management Tools Survey. http://www.incose.org/INCOSE. Accessed 25 Sept 2013
Parker, J.: When Choosing a Requirements Management Tool, CEO of Enfocus Solutions Inc. http://enfocussolutions.comConsiderations. Accessed 25 Sept 2013
Eriksson, U.: Choosing the Right Tool for your Testing and Requirements Management. http://www.eurostarconferences.com (2012). Accessed 25 Sept 2013
Shrivathsan, M.: Requirements Management Tools—overview. http://pmblog.accompa.com (2009). Accessed 25 Sept 2013
Beatty, J., Ferrari, R.: “How to Evaluate and Select a Requirements Management Tool”, SeilevelWhitepaper. www.seilevel.com/ba-resources/requirements-toolsreviews/(2011). Accessed 25 Sept 2013
http://www.volere.co.uk/tools.htm. Accessed 25 Sept 2013
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Violante, M.G., Vezzetti, E. & Alemanni, M. An integrated approach to support the Requirement Management (RM) tool customization for a collaborative scenario. Int J Interact Des Manuf 11, 191–204 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0266-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0266-3