Where do we stand in requirements engineering improvement today?: first results from a mapping study

Daniel Méndez Fernández, Saahil Ognawala, S. Wagner, M. Daneva
{"title":"Where do we stand in requirements engineering improvement today?: first results from a mapping study","authors":"Daniel Méndez Fernández, Saahil Ognawala, S. Wagner, M. Daneva","doi":"10.1145/2652524.2652555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Requirements engineering process improvement (REPI) approaches have gained much attention in research and practice. Goal: So far, there is no comprehensive view on the research in REPI in terms of solutions and current state of reported evidence. We aims to provide an overview on the existing solutions, their underlying principles and their research type facets, i.e. their state of empirical evidence. Method: To this end, we conducted a systematic mapping study of the REPI publication space. Results: This paper reports on the first findings regarding research type facets of the contributions as well as selected methodological principles. We found a strong focus in the existing research on solution proposals for REPI approaches that concentrate on normative assessments and benchmarks of the RE activities rather than on holistic RE improvements according to individual goals of companies. Conclusions: We conclude, so far, that there is a need to broaden the work and to investigate more problem-driven REPI which also targets the improvement of the quality of the underlying RE artefacts, which currently seem out of scope.","PeriodicalId":124452,"journal":{"name":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2652524.2652555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Context: Requirements engineering process improvement (REPI) approaches have gained much attention in research and practice. Goal: So far, there is no comprehensive view on the research in REPI in terms of solutions and current state of reported evidence. We aims to provide an overview on the existing solutions, their underlying principles and their research type facets, i.e. their state of empirical evidence. Method: To this end, we conducted a systematic mapping study of the REPI publication space. Results: This paper reports on the first findings regarding research type facets of the contributions as well as selected methodological principles. We found a strong focus in the existing research on solution proposals for REPI approaches that concentrate on normative assessments and benchmarks of the RE activities rather than on holistic RE improvements according to individual goals of companies. Conclusions: We conclude, so far, that there is a need to broaden the work and to investigate more problem-driven REPI which also targets the improvement of the quality of the underlying RE artefacts, which currently seem out of scope.
我们今天在需求工程改进方面处于什么位置?第一个结果来自一项测绘研究
背景:需求工程过程改进(REPI)方法在研究和实践中获得了很多关注。目标:到目前为止,在解决方案和报告证据的现状方面,对REPI的研究还没有一个全面的看法。我们的目的是概述现有的解决方案,其基本原则和他们的研究类型方面,即他们的经验证据状态。方法:为此,我们对REPI出版空间进行了系统的制图研究。结果:本文报告了关于贡献的研究类型方面的第一个发现以及选择的方法原则。我们发现,在现有的研究中,对REPI方法的解决方案建议的关注非常强烈,这些方法关注于可再生能源活动的规范性评估和基准,而不是根据公司的个人目标对可再生能源进行整体改进。结论:到目前为止,我们得出的结论是,有必要扩大工作范围,并调查更多问题驱动的REPI,这也以提高底层RE工件的质量为目标,这目前似乎超出了范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信