Requirements reviews revisited: Residual challenges and open research questions

Frank Salger
{"title":"Requirements reviews revisited: Residual challenges and open research questions","authors":"Frank Salger","doi":"10.1109/RE.2013.6636725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is widely accepted that early reviews on requirements specifications (RS) are an effective and efficient quality assurance technique. So why are they still not applied all over the software industry? In this paper we pinpoint that this is due to five major challenges: 1) Software requirements are based on flawed `upstream' requirements and reviews on RS are thus in vain. 2) The impact of sociological issues related to reviews is underestimated. 3) Important quality aspects of RS escape reviews. 4) The goal of applying reviews is not made clear and different review approaches are mixed. 5) Incremental software development poses specific challenges to applying reviews on RS. In this paper we argue that in order to solve these five challenges research on reviews must take a more holistic approach, stretching to pre-project phases and incorporating various other disciplines in order to add more value for the software industry. The paper also offers preliminary solutions to the discussed challenges and sketches open research questions of high relevance for the software industry.","PeriodicalId":6342,"journal":{"name":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"45 1","pages":"250-255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2013.6636725","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

It is widely accepted that early reviews on requirements specifications (RS) are an effective and efficient quality assurance technique. So why are they still not applied all over the software industry? In this paper we pinpoint that this is due to five major challenges: 1) Software requirements are based on flawed `upstream' requirements and reviews on RS are thus in vain. 2) The impact of sociological issues related to reviews is underestimated. 3) Important quality aspects of RS escape reviews. 4) The goal of applying reviews is not made clear and different review approaches are mixed. 5) Incremental software development poses specific challenges to applying reviews on RS. In this paper we argue that in order to solve these five challenges research on reviews must take a more holistic approach, stretching to pre-project phases and incorporating various other disciplines in order to add more value for the software industry. The paper also offers preliminary solutions to the discussed challenges and sketches open research questions of high relevance for the software industry.
需求回顾:剩余的挑战和开放的研究问题
需求说明(RS)的早期评审是一种有效且高效的质量保证技术,这一点已被广泛接受。那么,为什么它们仍然没有在整个软件行业得到应用呢?在本文中,我们指出这是由于五个主要的挑战:1)软件需求是基于有缺陷的“上游”需求,因此对RS的审查是徒劳的。2)与评论相关的社会学问题的影响被低估。3) RS逃生评审的重要质量方面。4)申请评审的目标不明确,不同的评审方式混杂。5)增量软件开发对在RS上应用评审提出了具体的挑战。在本文中,我们认为为了解决这五个挑战,对评审的研究必须采取更全面的方法,延伸到项目前阶段,并结合各种其他学科,以便为软件行业增加更多的价值。本文还为讨论的挑战提供了初步解决方案,并概述了与软件行业高度相关的开放性研究问题。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信