skip to main content
10.1145/3019612.3019753acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An approach based on design practices to specify requirements in agile projects

Authors Info & Claims
Published:03 April 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The agile manifesto highlights a frequent communication with the customer to detail his/her needs and to validate the software requirements through frequent software deliveries. So, the agile methods treat the Software Requirements Specification (SRS) differently from the traditional development methods. User stories are one of the most widely used approaches to specify requirements in agile projects. However, empirical studies in the industry point out that user stories are targeted to customers, only cover simple functional requirements visible to the users, and do not address system and non-functional requirements that are also required for coding, testing, and maintaining. We propose an approach to specify requirements based on design practices targeted to the developer. We conducted an industrial case study during eight months to evaluate the proposed approach. The initial findings indicate that the SRS is closer to what will be implemented, and it meets the developers' expectations.

References

  1. Agile Manifesto. Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Available: http://www.agilemanifesto.org/. 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. VersionOne. 9TH Annual State of Agile Survey. Available: http://info.versionone.com/state-of-agile-development-survey-ninth.html. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Heikkilä, V. T., Damian, D., Lassenius, C., and Paasivaara, M. A Mapping Study on Requirements Engineering in Agile Software Development, 41st Euromicro, Funchal. 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Read, A. and Briggs, R.O. The Many Lives of an Agile Story: Design Processes, Design Products, and Understandings in a Large-Scale Agile Development Project. 45th Hawaü International Conference, pp.5319,5328. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Daneva, M., Van Der Veen, E., Amrit, C., Ghaisas, S., Sikkel, K., Kumar, R., Ajmeri, N., Wieringa, R. Agile requirements prioritization in large-scale outsourced system projects: An empirical study. J. Syst. Soft. 86, 5. 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Medeiros, J., Goulão, M., Vasconcelos, A., and Silva, C. Towards a model about quality of software requirements specification in agile projects. 10th QUATIC. Lisbon, Portugal. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Povilaitis, S. Acceptance Criteria. Available: http://www.leadingagile.com/2014/09/acceptance-criteria/. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Heck, P. and Zaidman, A. A quality framework for agile requirements: a practitioner's perspective. http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.4692.2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bjarnason, E., Wnuk, K. and Regnell, B. A case study on benefits and side-effects of agile practices in large-scale requirements engineering. 1st AREW. ACM, USA. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Lee,J.C, Judge,T.K, McCrickard, D.S. Evaluating eXtreme scenario-based design in a distributed agile team. CHI EA. New York, USA, 863--877. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Haugset,B., Stalhane,T. Automated Acceptance Testing as an Agile Requirements Engineering Practice. 45th HICSS, Maui, HI, pp. 5289--5298. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hirschheim, R., Klein, K., and Lyytinen, Kalle. Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge Univ., USA. 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. Conceptual Modeling, Databases and CASE: An Integrated View of Information System Development. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA. 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Olivé, A. Conceptual Modeling of Information Systems, Springer Verlag, ISBN 978-3-540-39389-7. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Schwaber, K. and Beedle, M. Agile Software Development with Scrum. Prentice Hall PTR, NJ, USA. 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Beck, K. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, USA. 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Agile Alliance. Practices Map. Available at: http://guide.agilealliance.org/subway.html. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohn, M. User Stories Applied: For Agile Software Development. Addison Wesley, Redwood, CA, USA. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ricca, F., Scanniello, G., Torchiano, M., Reggio, G., and Astesiano, E. Assessing the Effect of Screen Mockups on the Comprehension of Functional Requirements. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 24, 1. 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Rivero, J.M., Grigera, J., Rossi, G., Luna, E. R., Montero, F., Gaedke, M. Mockup-Driven Development: Providing agile support for Model-Driven Web Engineering, IST, 56,6. 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Ferreira, J., Noble, J. and Biddle, R. Agile Development Iterations and UI Design, Agile Conference (AGILE), Washington, DC, pp. 50--58. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Whichard, G. Definition of Done vs. Acceptance Criteria, http://www.governmentciomagazine.com/2014/08/definition-done-vs-acceptance-criteria. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Mamoli, S. On Acceptance Criteria for User Stories. Available: http://nomad8.com/acceptance_criteria/. 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Medeiros, J., Alves, D., Wanderley, E., Vasconcelos, A. and Silva, C. Requirements Engineering in Agile Projects: A Systematic Mapping based in Evidences of Industry. ESELAW, CIBSE. Peru, pp.460--476. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Medeiros, F., Medeiros, J., Ayres, F., Viana, C., Rocha, J., Viegas, V., Mendes, E., Santos, A. An Information System to Support the Anti-doping Process. Information Science and Applications (ICISA). Springer Singapore. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Wohlin, C., Höst, M., and Henningsson, K. Empirical Research Methods in Software Engineering. Lecture notes in Computer Science, 2765 7--23. 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Runeson, P. and Martin, H. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Software. Eng. 14, 2, 131--164. 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. ISO/IEEE 830-1998. Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications, IEEE. 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Batool, A., Hafeez, Y., Asghar, S., Abbas, M.A., Hassan, M.S.. A Scrum Framework for Requirement Engineering Practices. ISSN: 2306-1448 (online). 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Gebhart, M., Giessler., P., Burkhardt, P., Abeck, S. Quality-Oriented Requirements Engineering for Agile Development of RESTful Participation Service. ICSEA. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. F. Wanderley, A. Silva, J. Araujo and D. S. Silveira. SnapMind: A framework to support consistency and validation of model-based requirements in agile development, IEEE 4th MoDRE, Karlskrona, Sweden. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. An approach based on design practices to specify requirements in agile projects

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

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

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SAC '17: Proceedings of the Symposium on Applied Computing
        April 2017
        2004 pages
        ISBN:9781450344869
        DOI:10.1145/3019612

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        © 2017 Association for Computing Machinery. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 3 April 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader