An Industrial Case Study of Immediate Benefits of Requirements Engineering Process Improvement at the Australian Center for Unisys Software
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This paper describes an industrial experience in process improvement at one of the Unisys development labs in Australia. Following a capability maturity model (CMM) mini-assessment, the organization is undertaking significant changes in the requirements management process, which include the introduction of group session approaches to requirements analysis and a structured method for writing requirements. An empirical evaluation which investigated other aspects of the process improvement than the CMM model indicates tangible benefits as well as perceived long-term benefits during design and testing. Findings confirm that a more thorough requirements analysis results in more clearly defined, better understood and specified requirements, and an enhanced ability to address the market needs and product strategy requirements. The catalyst behind these improvements included project management leadership, managing the human dimension, collaboration among stakeholders and senior management support.
Basili, V., McGarry, F., Pajerski, R., and Zelkowitz, M. 2002. Lessons learned from 25 years of process improvement: The rise and fall of the NASA software engineering laboratory. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) 2002. Orlando, Florida.
Brodman, J., and Johnson, D. 1996. Return on investment from software process improvement as measured by U.S. industry. In Crosstalk 9(4): 23–29.
Capability Maturity Model for Software, CMU/SEI-91-TR-24, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
Chaos Report, Few IS Project Come in on Time, on Budget, Computer World 12, Dec., 20, 1995.
Dion, R. 1993. Process improvement and the corporate balance sheet. IEEE Software 10(4): 28–35.
Diaz, M., and Sligo, J. 1997. How software process improvement helped Motorola. IEEE Software 14(5): 75–81.
El Emam, K., and Birk, A. 2000. Validating the ISO/IEC 15504 measure of software requirements analysis process capability. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26(6): 541–566.
El Emam, K., and Briand, L. 1997. Costs and Benefits of Software Process Improvement, International Software Engineering Research Network Technical Report ISERN-97-12.
El Emam, K., Drouin, J.-N., and Melo, W. (eds.). SPICE: The Theory and Practice of Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. IEEE CS Press, 1998.
Hall, T., Beecham, S., and Rainer, A. 2002. Requirements problems in twelve software companies: an empirical analysis. IEE proceedings Software.
Halligan, R. 2000. TAA's SE Training Courseware, Halligan Corporation Pty Ltd.
Herbsleb, J. D., and Goldenson, D. R. 1996. A systematic survey of CMM experience and results. In Proceedings of the 18th International conference on Software Engineering. Berlin, Germany, pp. 323-330.
Humphrey, W. S., Snyder, T. R., and Willis, R. R. 1991. Software process improvement at Hughes aircraft. IEEE Software 8(4): 11–23.
ICRE1996: Ripe Fruit in RE: Techniques you can exploit NOW, Panel at the 2nd International Conference of Requirements Engineering, p. 42, 1996.
ISO/IEC 15504. 1998. Information technology-Software process assessment, Technical report-Type 2.
Johnson, A. 1994. Software process improvement experience in the DP/MIS function. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering.
Kotonya, G., and Sommerville, I. 1997. Requirements Engineering Processes and Techniques. John Wiley.
Laporte, C. Y., and Trudel, S. 1998. Addressing the people issues of process improvement activities at Oerlikon Aerospace. Software Process, Improvement and Practice 4(4): 187–198.
Lauesen, S., and Vinters, O. 2001. Preventing requirements defects. Requirements Engineering Journal 6(1): 37–50.
Macaulay, L. 1996. Requirements Engineering. Springer-Verlag.
Moitra, D. 1998. Managing change for software process improvement initiatives: a practical experiencebased approach. Software Process, Improvement and Practice 4(4): 199–208.
Osborne, M., and MacNish, C. 1996. Processing natural language software requirements specification. Proceedings of 2nd IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, ICRE96. Colorado Springs, Colorado, 229-236.
Paulk, M., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M., and Weber, C. 1993. Capability Maturity Model for software, Version 1.1, CMU/SEI-93-TR-24, Software Engineering Institute USA.
Quality standards: Quality management and quality assurance standards, Int. Org. for Standardization, 1987.
Sawyer, P., Sommerville, I., and Viller, S. 1998. Improving the requirements process. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation of Software Quality (REFSQ'98). Pisa, Italy, pp. 71-84.
Shubert, S., Spyridakis, J., Holmback, H., and Coney, M. B. 1995. The comprehensibility of simplified English in procedures. Journal of Technical Writing and Commune 25(4): 347–369.
Siegel, S. 1956. Nonparametric Statistics. McGraw-Hill.
SEI, 1995: Software Engineering Institute: The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison Wesley, 1995.
Sommerville, I. 2003. Private Communications.
Sommerville, I., and Sawyer, P. 1997. Requirements Engineering, A Good Practice Guide. Wiley, Great Britain.
Stelzer, D., and Mellis, W. 1998. Success factors of organizational change in software process improvement. Software Process, Improvement and Practice 4(4): 227–250.
Wohlwend, H., and Rosenbaum, S. 1993. Software process improvement in an international company. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 212-220.
- An Industrial Case Study of Immediate Benefits of Requirements Engineering Process Improvement at the Australian Center for Unisys Software
Empirical Software Engineering
Volume 9, Issue 1-2 , pp 45-75
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- Requirements engineering
- process improvement
- industrial case study
- empirical assessment
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Computer Science, University of Victoria, BC, PO Box 3055, BC, Canada, V8W 3P6
- 2. Faculty of Information Technology, University of Technology, Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia
- 3. Unisys Australia Limited, 1C Homebush Bay Drive, Rhodes, NSW 2138, Australia