Supporting Learning Organisations in Writing Better Requirements Documents Based on Heuristic Critiques

  • Eric Knauss
  • Kurt Schneider
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7195)


Context & motivation: Despite significant advances in requirements engineering (RE) research and practice, software developing organisations still struggle to create requirements documentation in sufficient quality and in a repeatable way. Question/problem: The notion of good-enough quality is domain and project specific. Software developing organisations need concepts that i) allow adopting a suitable set of RE methods for their domain and projects and ii) allow improving these methods continuously. Principal ideas/results: Automatic analysis of requirements documentation can support a process of organisational learning. Such approaches help improve requirements documents, but can also start a discussion about its desired quality. Contribution: We present a learning model based on heuristic critiques. The paper shows how this concept can support learning on both the organisational and individual levels.


heuristic critiques requirements documentation learning software organisations experience management 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wilson, W.M., Rosenberg, L.H., Hyatt, L.E.: Automated analysis of requirement specifications. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 1997), pp. 161–171. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kof, L.: Text Analysis for Requirements Engineering. PhD thesis, Technische Universität München, München (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee, S.W., Muthurajan, D., Gandhi, R.A., Yavagal, D.S., Ahn, G.J.: Building Decision Support Problem Domain Ontology from Natural Language Requirements for Software Assurance. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 16(6), 851–884 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gleich, B., Creighton, O., Kof, L.: Ambiguity Detection: Towards a Tool Explaining Ambiguity Sources. In: Wieringa, R., Persson, A. (eds.) REFSQ 2010. LNCS, vol. 6182, pp. 218–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kiyavitskaya, N., Zeni, N., Mich, L., Berry, D.M.: Requirements for tools for ambiguity identification and measurement in natural language requirements specifications. Requirements Engineering Journal 13(3), 207–239 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gervasi, V., Zowghi, D.: On the Role of Ambiguity in RE. In: Wieringa, R., Persson, A. (eds.) REFSQ 2010. LNCS, vol. 6182, pp. 248–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berry, D., Kamsties, E.: 2. Ambiguity in Requirements Specification. In: Perspectives on Requirements Engineering, pp. 7–44. Kluwer (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fabbrini, F., Fusani, M., Gnesi, S., Lami, G.: An Automatic Quality Evaluation for Natural Language Requirements. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on RE: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 2001), Interlaken, Switzerland, pp. 150–164 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Knauss, E., Schneider, K., Stapel, K.: Learning to Write Better Requirements through Heuristic Critiques. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Requirementes Engineering Conference (RE 2009), pp. 387–388. IEEE Computer Society, Atlanta (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schneider, K.: Experience and Knowledge Management in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knauss, E., Lübke, D., Meyer, S.: Feedback-Driven Requirements Engineering: The Heuristic Requirements Assistant. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2009), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 587–590 (May 2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Solingen, R., Berghout, E.: The Goal/Question/Metric Method: A Practical Guide for Quality Improvement of Software Development. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Knauss
    • 1
  • Kurt Schneider
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Engineering GroupLeibniz Universität HannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations