Abstract
The importance of continuously improving requirements engineering (RE) has been recognised for many years. Similar to available software process improvement approaches, most RE improvement approaches focus on a normative and solution-driven assessment of companies rather than on a problem-driven RE improvement. The approaches dictate the implementation of a one-size-fits-all reference model without doing a proper problem investigation first, whereas the notion of quality factually depends on whether RE achieves company-specific goals. The approaches furthermore propagate process areas and methods, without proper awareness of the quality in the created artefacts on which the quality of many development phases rely. Little knowledge exists about how to conduct a problem-driven RE improvement that gives attention to the improvement of the artefacts. A promising solution is to start an improvement with an empirical investigation of the RE stakeholders, goals, and artefacts in the company to identify problems while abstracting from inherently complex processes. The RE improvement is then defined and implemented in joint action research workshops with the stakeholders to validate potential solutions while again concentrating on the artefacts. In this paper, we contribute an artefact-based, problem-driven RE improvement approach that emerged from a series of completed RE improvements. We discuss lessons learnt and present first result from an ongoing empirical evaluation at a German company. Our results suggest that our approach supports process engineers in a problem-driven RE improvement, but we need deeper examination of the resulting RE company standard, which is in scope of the final evaluation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Napier, N., Mathiassen, L., Johnson, R.: Combining Perceptions and Prescriptions in Requirements Engineering Process Assessment: An Industrial Case Study. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35(5), 593–606 (2009)
Méndez Fernández, D., Wagner, S.: Naming the Pain in Requirements Engineering: Design of a global Family of Surveys and first Results from Germany. In: EASE 2013, pp. 183–194. ACM (2013)
Staples, M., Niazi, M., Jeffery, R., Abrahams, A., Byatt, P., Murphy, R.: An Exploratory Study of why Organizations do not adopt CMMI. Journal of Systems and Software 80(6), 883–895 (2007)
Pettersson, F., Ivarsson, M., Gorschek, T., Öhman, P.: A practitioner’s Guide to light weight Software Process Assessment and Improvement Planning. Journal of Systems and Software 81(6), 972–995 (2008)
Fernandez, D., Penzenstadler, B., Kuhrmann, M.: Pattern-based Guideline to Empirically Analyse Software Development Processes. In: EASE 2012, pp. 136–145. IET (2012)
Méndez Fernández, D., Wagner, S., Lochmann, K., Baumann, A., de Carne, H.: Field Study on Requirements Engineering: Investigation of Artefacts, Project Parameters, and Execution Strategies. Information and Software Technology 54(2), 162–178 (2012)
Beecham, S., Hall, T., Rainer, A.: Defining a Requirements Process Improvement Model. Software Quality Journal 13(3), 247–279 (2005)
Brinkkemper, S., van de Weerd, I., Saeki, M., Versendaal, J.: Process Improvement in Requirements Management: A Method Engineering Approach. In: Rolland, C. (ed.) REFSQ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5025, pp. 6–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Beecham, S., Hall, T., Britton, C., Cottee, M., Austen, R.: Using an Expert Panel to Validate A Requirements Process Improvement Model. Journal of Systems and Software 76, 251–275 (2005)
Seaman, C.: Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25(4), 557–572 (1999)
Wieringa, R.: Relevance and problem choice in design science. In: Winter, R., Zhao, J.L., Aier, S. (eds.) DESRIST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6105, pp. 61–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Méndez Fernández, D., Penzenstadler, B., Kuhrmann, M., Broy, M.: A Meta Model for Artefact-Orientation: Fundamentals and Lessons Learned in Requirements Engineering. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) MODELS 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6395, pp. 183–197. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Méndez Fernández, D. Lochmann, K., Penzenstadler, B., Wagner, S.: A Case Study on the Application of an Artefact-Based Requirements Engineering Approach. In: EASE 2011, pp. 104–113. IET (2011)
Runeson, P., Höst, M.: Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Case Study Research in Software Engineering. Empirical Software Engineering 14(2), 131–164 (2009)
Méndez Fernández, D., Kuhrmann, M.: Artefact-Based Requirements Engineering and its Integration into a Process Framework. Technical Report TUM-I0929, Technische Universität München (2009)
Wieringa, R., Aycse, M.: Technical Action Research as a Validation Method in Information Systems Design Science. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 220–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Davison, R., Martinsons, M.G., Kock, N.: Principles of Canonical Action Research. Information Systems Journal 14(1), 65–86 (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Méndez Fernández, D., Wieringa, R. (2013). Improving Requirements Engineering by Artefact Orientation. In: Heidrich, J., Oivo, M., Jedlitschka, A., Baldassarre, M.T. (eds) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7983. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39259-7_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39259-7_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39258-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39259-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)