research-article

Needs and challenges for a platform to support large-scale requirements engineering: a multiple-case study

Authors:

Cristina Palomares,

Mikko Raatikainen,

Martin Stettinger,

Zijad Kurtanovic,

Andreas Falkner,

Gottfried Schenner,

Fabrizio Brasca,

Tomi Männistö,

Alexander Felfernig,

Walid MaalejAuthors Info & Claims

ESEM '18: Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

Article No.: 19, Pages 1 - 10

https://doi.org/10.1145/3239235.3240498

Published: 11 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Background: Requirement engineering is often considered a critical activity in system development projects. The increasing complexity of software as well as number and heterogeneity of stakeholders motivate the development of methods and tools for improving large-scale requirement engineering. Aims: The empirical study presented in this paper aim to identify and understand the characteristics and challenges of a platform, as desired by experts, to support requirement engineering for individual stakeholders, based on the current pain-points of their organizations when dealing with a large number requirements. Method: We conducted a multiple case study with three companies in different domains. We collected data through ten semi-structured interviews with experts from these companies. Results: The main pain-point for stakeholders is handling the vast amount of data from different sources. The foreseen platform should leverage such data to manage changes in requirements according to customers' and users' preferences. It should also offer stakeholders an estimation of how long a requirements engineering task will take to complete, along with an easier requirements dependency identification and requirements reuse strategy. Conclusions: The findings provide empirical evidence about how practitioners wish to improve their requirement engineering processes and tools. The insights are a starting point for in-depth investigations into the problems and solutions presented. Practitioners can use the results to improve existing or design new practices and tools.

References

[1]

Daniel M. Berry. 2017. Evaluation of Tools for Hairy Requirements and Software Engineering Tasks. 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW) (2017), 284--291.

[2]

Kathy Charmaz. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis (Introducing Qualitative Methods series). SAGE Publications.

[3]

Daniela Damian and James Chisan. 2006. An empirical study of the complex relationships between requirements engineering processes and other processes that lead to payoffs in productivity, quality, and risk management. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 32, 7 (2006), 433--453.

Digital Library

[4]

Juan M Carrillo De Gea, Joaquín Nicolás, José L. Fernández Alemán, Ambrosio Toval, Christof Ebert, and Aurora Vizcaíno. 2012. Requirements engineering tools: Capabilities, survey and assessment. Information and Software Technology 54, 10 (2012), 1142--1157.

Digital Library

[5]

Tore Dybå. 2005. An empirical investigation of the key factors for success in software process improvement. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31, 5 (2005), 410--424.

Digital Library

[6]

Daniel Méndez Fernández and Stefan Wagner. 2015. Naming the pain in requirements engineering: A design for a global family of surveys and first results from Germany. Information and Software Technology 57 (2015), 616--643.

[7]

Daniel Méndez Fernández, Stefan Wagner, Marcos Kalinowski, Michael Felderer, Priscilla Mafra, Antonio Vetrò, Tayana Conte, Magne Christiansson, Desmond Greer, Casper Lassenius, et al. 2017. Naming the pain in requirements engineering. Empirical software engineering 22, 5 (2017), 2298--2338.

Digital Library

[8]

Daniel Méndez Fernández, Stefan Wagner, Klaus Lochmann, Andrea Baumann, and Holger de Carne. 2012. Field study on requirements engineering: Investigation of artefacts, project parameters, and execution strategies. Information and Software Technology 54, 2 (2012), 162--178.

Digital Library

[9]

Donald Firesmith. 2004. Prioritizing requirements. Journal of Object Technology 3, 8 (2004), 35--48.

[10]

Xavier Franch, Daniel Mendéz Fernández, Marc Oriol, Andreas Vogelsang, Rogardt Heldal, Eric Knauss, Guillerme Travassos, Jeffrey Carver, Oscar Dieste, and Thomas Zimmermann. 2017. How do Practitioners Perceive the Relevance of Requirements Engineering Research? An Ongoing Study. In 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE). 382--387.

[11]

Heli Hiisilä, Marjo Kauppinen, and Sari Kujala. 2015. Challenges of the Customer Organization's Requirements Engineering Process in the Outsourced Environment-A Case Study. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 214--229.

[12]

Axel Hoffmann, Andrej Janzen, Holger Hoffmann, and J Leimeister. 2014. Success Factors for Requirement Patterns Approaches Exploring Requirements Analysts' Opinions and Whishes. (2014).

[13]

Hubert Hofmann and Franz Lehner. 2001. Requirements engineering as a success factor in software projects. IEEE software 18, 4 (2001), 58.

Digital Library

[14]

Sofija Hotomski, Eya Ben Charrada, and Martin Glinz. 2016. An exploratory study on handling requirements and acceptance test documentation in industry. In Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2016 IEEE 24th International. IEEE, 116--125.

[15]

Timo Johann, Christoph Stanik, Alizadeh Alireza, and Walid Maalej. 2017. SAFE: A Simple Approach for Feature Extraction from App Descriptions and App Reviews. 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) (2017), 21--30.

[16]

Walid Maalej, Zijad Kurtanovic, and Alexander Felfernig. 2014. What stakeholders need to know about requirements. In Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE), 2014 IEEE Fourth International Workshop on. IEEE, 64--71.

[17]

Walid Maalej, Maleknaz Nayebi, Timo Johann, and Guenther Ruhe. 2016. Toward data-driven requirements engineering. IEEE Software 33, 1 (2016), 48--54.

Digital Library

[18]

Michele Marchesi, Giancarlo Succi, Don Wells, Laurie Williams, and James Donovan Wells. 2003. Extreme programming perspectives. Vol. 176. Addison-Wesley.

[19]

Tommi Mikkonen, Casper Lassenius, Tomi Männistö, Markku Oivo, and Janne Järvinen. 2018. Continuous and collaborative technology transfer: Software engineering research with real-time industry impact. Information and Software Technology 95 (2018), 34--45.

[20]

Matthew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage.

[21]

Cristina Palomares, Xavier Franch, and Davide Fucci. 2018. Personal Recommendations in Requirements Engineering: The OpenReq Approach. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 297--304.

[22]

Cristina Palomares, Carme Quer, and Xavier Franch. 2017. Requirements reuse and requirement patterns: a state of the practice survey. Empirical Software Engineering 22, 6 (2017), 2719--2762.

Digital Library

[23]

Mikko Raatikainen, Tomi Männistö, Teemu Tommila, and Janne Valkonen. 2011. Challenges of requirements engineering---A case study in nuclear energy domain. In Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2011 19th IEEE International. IEEE, 253--258.

Digital Library

[24]

Björn Regnell and Sjaak Brinkkemper. 2005. Market-driven requirements engineering for software products. In Engineering and managing software requirements. Springer, 287--308.

[25]

Björn Regnell, Richard Berntsson Svensson, and Krzysztof Wnuk. 2008. Can we beat the complexity of very large-scale requirements engineering?. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 123--128.

Digital Library

[26]

Patrick Rempel, Patrick Mçder, and Tobias Kuschke. 2013. An empirical study on project-specific traceability strategies. In Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2013 21st IEEE International. IEEE, 195--204.

[27]

Per Runeson and Martin Höst. 2009. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical software engineering 14, 2 (2009), 131.

Digital Library

[28]

Carolyn B. Seaman. 1999. Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. IEEE Transactions on software engineering 25, 4 (1999), 557--572.

Digital Library

[29]

Neetu Kumari Sethia and Anitha S Pillai. 2014. The effects of requirements elicitation issues on software project performance: An empirical analysis. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 285--300.

Digital Library

[30]

Ernst Sikora, Bastian Tenbergen, and Klaus Pohl. 2011. Requirements engineering for embedded systems: An investigation of industry needs. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 151--165.

Digital Library

[31]

Muhammad Usman, Emilia Mendes, and Jürgen Börstler. 2015. Effort estimation in agile software development: a survey on the state of the practice. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. ACM, 12.

Digital Library

[32]

Muhammad Usman, Emilia Mendes, Francila Weidt, and Ricardo Britto. 2014. Effort estimation in agile software development: a systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Predictive Models in Software Engineering. ACM, 82--91.

Digital Library

[33]

Cathrin Weiss, Rahul Premraj, Thomas Zimmermann, and Andreas Zeller. 2007. How long will it take to fix this bug?. In Mining Software Repositories, 2007. ICSE Workshops MSR'07. Fourth International Workshop on. IEEE, 1--1.

Digital Library

[34]

Krzysztof Wnuk, Björn Regnell, and Brian Berenbach. 2011. Scaling up requirements engineering-exploring the challenges of increasing size and complexity in market-driven software development. In International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 54--59.

Digital Library

[35]

Robert K Yin. 2017. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.

Cited By

Hamza MIqbal MAhmad S(2024)AI-Driven Assistants' Potential for Scaled Agile Software DevelopmentBulletin of Business and Economics (BBE)10.61506/01.0041613:2(974-982)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00416
Saklamaeva VPavlič L(2023)The Potential of AI-Driven Assistants in Scaled Agile Software DevelopmentApplied Sciences10.3390/app1401031914:1(319)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.3390/app14010319
Raatikainen MMotger QLüders CFranch XMyllyaho LKettunen EMarco JTiihonen JHalonen MMännistö T(2023)Improved Management of Issue Dependencies in Issue Trackers of Large Collaborative ProjectsIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2022.321216649:4(2128-2148)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2022.3212166
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Needs and challenges for a platform to support large-scale requirements engineering: a multiple-case study
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Designing software
      1. Requirements analysis

Recommendations

A case study on benefits and side-effects of agile practices in large-scale requirements engineering
AREW '11: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Agile Requirements Engineering

In the software industry, there is a strong shift from traditional phase-based development towards agile methods and practices. This paper reports on a case study aimed at investigating if, and how, agile Requirements Engineering (RE) can remedy the ...
Agile quality requirements engineering challenges: first results from a case study
ESEM '17: Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

Agile software development methods have become increasingly popular in the last years. Despite their popularity, they have been criticized for focusing on delivering functional requirements and neglecting the quality requirements. Several studies have ...
A multi-case study of agile requirements engineering and the use of test cases as requirements

ContextIt is an enigma that agile projects can succeed 'without requirements' when weak requirements engineering is a known cause for project failures. While agile development projects often manage well without extensive requirements test cases are ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ESEM '18: Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

October 2018

487 pages

ISBN:9781450358231

DOI:10.1145/3239235

General Chair:
Markku Oivo
University of Oulu, Finland
,
Program Chairs:
Daniel Méndez
Technical University of Munich, Germany
,
Audris Mockus
University of Tennessee

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

In-Cooperation

IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 October 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Horizon 2020

Conference

ESEM '18

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ESEM '18: ACM / IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

October 11 - 12, 2018

Oulu, Finland

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 130 of 594 submissions, 22%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

15
Total Citations
View Citations
328
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)39
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4

Reflects downloads up to 01 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Hamza MIqbal MAhmad S(2024)AI-Driven Assistants' Potential for Scaled Agile Software DevelopmentBulletin of Business and Economics (BBE)10.61506/01.0041613:2(974-982)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00416
Saklamaeva VPavlič L(2023)The Potential of AI-Driven Assistants in Scaled Agile Software DevelopmentApplied Sciences10.3390/app1401031914:1(319)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.3390/app14010319
Raatikainen MMotger QLüders CFranch XMyllyaho LKettunen EMarco JTiihonen JHalonen MMännistö T(2023)Improved Management of Issue Dependencies in Issue Trackers of Large Collaborative ProjectsIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2022.321216649:4(2128-2148)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2022.3212166
Chen YJupp J(2023)Investigating Requirements Management Capabilities in Major Infrastructure Project Delivery2023 IEEE Engineering Informatics10.1109/IEEECONF58110.2023.10520370(01-11)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEECONF58110.2023.10520370
Zhou HWang TZhang YShen Y(2023)TLDBERT: Leveraging Further Pre-Trained Model for Issue Typed Links Detection2023 30th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)10.1109/APSEC60848.2023.00077(594-598)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC60848.2023.00077
Lüders CPietz TMaalej W(2023)On understanding and predicting issue linksRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-023-00406-x28:4(541-565)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s00766-023-00406-x
Chen YJupp J(2023)Towards a Requirements Co-engineering Improvement Framework: Supporting Digital Delivery Methods in Complex Infrastructure ProjectsProduct Lifecycle Management. PLM in Transition Times: The Place of Humans and Transformative Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-25182-5_26(262-273)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25182-5_26
Lüders CBouraffa AMaalej WLo DMcIntosh SNovielli N(2022)Beyond duplicatesProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.1145/3524842.3528457(48-60)Online publication date: 23-May-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3524842.3528457
Luders CPietz TMaalej W(2022)Automated Detection of Typed Links in Issue Trackers2022 IEEE 30th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)10.1109/RE54965.2022.00010(26-38)Online publication date: Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/RE54965.2022.00010
Wohlrab RKnauss EPelliccione P(2022)Why and how to balance alignment and diversity of requirements engineering practices in automotiveJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2019.110516162:COnline publication date: 21-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2019.110516
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten