Optima: a domain-specific model for prioritization and conflicts management in requirements engineering for services intermediaries

  • Bertrand Verlaine
  • Ivan J. Jureta
  • Stéphane Faulkner
Original Research Paper


New business models are set up, thanks to Web technologies. In this work, we focus on services intermediary companies. They generate value through the (automatic) selection of third-party services and the (automatic) delivery of the combinations of these services to consumers. Such companies face the problem of deciding which services to select and deliver in order to maximize their profit. The two main paper objectives are (i) to design the generic business model of services intermediaries and (ii) to propose an optimization model. The latter enables to choose the consumer requirements that will be satisfied in order to maximize profit. This model ranks implementable solutions based on various financial aspects. They are related to cost and revenue information that is associated with the requirements. It can support the decision-making process that aims at selecting a profit-maximizing set of requirements for services intermediaries’ system-to-be. Indeed, the proposed model solves the conflicts between requirements and prioritizes the optional requirements. We argue for the relevance of the optimization model via an example and simulations.


Requirements engineering Service-oriented systems  Services intermediary Requirements prioritization Conflicts resolution 


  1. 1.
    Alenljung B, Persson A (2006) Decision-making activities in requirements engineering decision processes: a case study. In: Nilsson AG, Gustas R, Wojtkowski W, Wojtkowski G, Wrycza S, Zupančič J (eds) In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on information systems development—bridging the gap between academia and industry, 14–17 August 2005. Springer, Karlstad, Sweden, pp 707–718Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bakos Y (1998) The emerging role of electronic marketplaces on the internet. Commun ACM 41(8):35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bano M, Ikram N (2010) Issues and challenges of requirement engineering in service oriented software development. In: the Fifth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2010). IEEE computer society, pp 64–69Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berander P, Andrews A (2005) Requirements prioritization. In: Aurum A, Wohlin C (eds) Engineering and managing software requirements, Springer, chap 4, pp 69–94Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bieberstein N, Bose S, Fiammante M, Jones K, Shah R (2006) Service-oriented architecture (SOA) compass: business value, planning, and enterprise roadmap. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boyle E, Humphreys P, McIvor R (2008) Reducing supply chain environmental uncertainty through e-intermediation: an organisation theory perspective. Int J Prod Econ 114(1):347–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Casati F, Ilnicki S, Jin Lj, Krishnamoorthy V, Shan MC (2000) Adaptive and dynamic service composition in eFlow. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE ’00), Springer-Verlag, pp 13–31Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaffey D (2007) E-business and E-commerce management, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng BH, Atlee JM (2009) Current and future research directions in requirements engineering. In: Lyytinen K, Loucopoulos P, Mylopoulos J, Robinson B (eds) Design requirements engineering: a ten-year perspective (Lecture notes in business information processing), vol 14. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 11–43Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Churchill GA, Iacobucci D (2009) Marketing research: methodological foundations, 10th edn. South-Western College, OhioGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cuaresma MJE, Koch N (2004) Requirements engineering for web applications–a comparative study. J Web Eng 2(3):193–212Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ernst NA, Mylopoulos J, Borgida A, Jureta I (2010) Reasoning with optional and preferred requirements. In: 29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2010) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), vol 6412. Springer, pp 118–131Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Felfernig A, Schubert M, Mandl M, Ricci F, Maalej W (2010) Recommendation and decision technologies for requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Recommendation Systems for Software Engineering, ACM Press, pp 11–15Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghose A, Yang S (2008) An Empirical analysis of sponsored search performance in search engine advertising. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Web Search and Web Data Mining, ACM Press, pp 241–250Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghose A, Yang S (2009) An empirical analysis of search engine advertising: sponsored search in electronic markets. Manag Sci 55(10):1605–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giaglis GM, Klein S, O’Keefe RM (2002) The role of intermediaries in electronic marketplaces: developing a contingency model. Inf Syst J 12(3):231–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gouscos D, Kalikakis M, Georgiadis P (2003) An approach to modeling Web service QoS and provision price. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, pp 121–130Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hill TP (1977) On goods and services. Rev of Income and Wealth 23(4):315–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jacobs S, Kethers S (1994) Improving communication and decision making within quality function deployment. In: Proceedings of the First Conference on Concurrent Engineering Research and Application, Concurrent Technologies Corporation, pp 203–213Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jelassi T, Enders A (2008) Strategies for E-Business: creating value through electronic and mobile commerce, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jureta IJ, Mylopoulos J, Faulkner S (2008) Revisiting the core ontology and problem in requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2008). IEEE Computer Society, pp 71–80Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jureta IJ, Borgida A, Ernst NA, Mylopoulos J (2010) Techne: towards a new generation of requirements modeling languages with goals, preferences, and inconsistency handling. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2010), IEEE Computer Society, pp 115–124Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kalakota R, Whinston AB (1997) Electronic commerce: a manager’s guide. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Karlsson J, Ryan K (1997) A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Softw 14(5):67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Klein M (1991) Supporting conflict resolution in cooperative design systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 21(6):1379–1390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Laffey D (2007) Paid search: the innovation that changed the Web. Bus Horiz 50(3):211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Lamsweerde A (2000) Requirements engineering in the year 00: a research perspective. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’2000), ACM Press, pp 5–19Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee K, Seda C (2009) Search engine advertising: buying your way to the top to increase sales, 2nd edn. New Riders Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lehtola L, Kauppinen M, Kujala S (2004) Requirements prioritization challenges in practice. In: Bomarius F, Iida H (eds) Product focused software process improvement (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 3009. Springer, pp 497–508Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lo A, Yu E (2007) From business models to service-oriented design: a reference catalog approach. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2007) (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 4801. Springer, pp 87–101Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Luna ER, Garrigós I, Grigera J, Winckler M (2010) Capture and evolution of web requirements using WebSpec. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Engineering (ICWE 2010) (Lecture notes in Computer Science), vol 6189. Springer, pp 173–188Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Maiden NAM, Ncube C (1998) Acquiring COTS software selection requirements. IEEE Softw 15(2):46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Liao S, Wang H, Yu ESK (2001) Exploring alternatives during requirements analysis. IEEE Softw 18(1):92–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nuseibeh B, Easterbrook SM (2000) Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering (ICSE 2000)-Future of SE Track. ACM Press, pp 35–46Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2010) Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers, 1st edn. Wiley, New York Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y, Tucci CL (2005) Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 16(1):1–25Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Papazoglou MP, Georgakopoulos D (2003) Service-oriented computing. Commun ACM 46(10):24–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Robinson WN, Volkov V (1998) Supporting the negotiation life cycle. Commun ACM 41(5):95–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Robinson WN, Pawlowski SD, Volkov V (2003) Requirements interaction management. ACM Comput Surv 35(2):132–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Roy J, Ramanujan A (2001) Understanding web services. IT Prof 3(6):69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ruhe G, Eberlein A, Pfahl D (2002) Quantitative WinWin: a new method for decision support in requirements negotiation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE 2002), pp 159–166Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rutz OJ, Bucklin RE (2007) A model of individual keyword performance in paid search advertising. Yale University, Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process, planning, piority setting. Resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New yorkGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Strigini L (1996) Limiting the dangers of intuitive decision making. IEEE Softw 13(1):101–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sutcliffe AG, Chang WC, Neville R (2003) Evolutionary requirements analysis. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2003), IEEE Computer Society, pp 264–73Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    The UK Search Engine Marketing Agency (Browser Media) (2009) Bing’s slowly gaining on Google’s market share. Available at:
  47. 47.
    Tsai WT (2005) Service-oriented system engineering: a new paradigm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), IEEE Computer Society, pp 3–6Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tsai WT, Jin Z, Wang P, Wu B (2007) Requirement engineering in service-oriented system engineering. In: Proceedings of ICEBE 2007, IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering and the Workshops SOAIC 2007, SOSE 2007, SOKM 2007, IEEE Computer Society, pp 661–668Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    van Eck P, Wieringa R (2003) Requirements engineering for service-oriented computing: a position paper. In: First International Workshop on e-Services at The 5th International Conference on Electronic Commerce (ICEC’03), TU Delft, pp 23–28Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    van Lamsweerde A (2009) Requirements engineering: from system goals to UML models to software specifications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wiegers K (2003) Software requirements. Microsoft Press, RedmondGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bertrand Verlaine
    • 1
  • Ivan J. Jureta
    • 1
  • Stéphane Faulkner
    • 1
  1. 1.PReCISE Research CenterUniversity of NamurNamurBelgium

Personalised recommendations