7.7.1 Getting the right requirements right

Abstract

Research has shown that there is an on‐going consensus that: good requirements are critical to the success of a project the current requirements paradigm produces poorly written requirements and ways of producing better requirements have been around for more than 20 years. So, instead of producing yet another paper on how to write better requirements, this paper begins by posing the following question: why do systems and software engineers continue to produce poor requirements when ways to write good requirements have been documented in conference papers and textbooks? The paper then documents findings from research into the problem via the systems thinking perspectives and hypothesises that there are two requirements paradigms; the original A paradigm and the current B paradigm which is inherently flawed. The paper then dissolves the problem of poor requirements by applying technology to reduce the need for most of the requirements written today.

7.3.1 Managing complexity: The Nine‐System Model

“…The literature contains many definitions of the word 'system'; Webster's dictionary, for example provides 51 (Webster, 2004). The common denominators in the 22 definitions of a system listed by Kasser (Kasser, 2013b) pages 178 -179) can be summarized by the elements shown in Figure 5 (Flood and Jackson, 1991) which omits an important aspect of a system, left out of all the definitions, namely that a system changes over time.…”

“…Looking at a system, a template definition that nudges the systems engineer towards best practices is "A system is an abstraction from the real world of a set of objects, each at some level of decomposition, at some period of time, in an arbitrary boundary, crafted for a purpose" (Kasser, 2013a) pages 251 to 252). This definition of the SOI allows the same SOI to be considered as two different systems if each system is a snapshot taken at a different time.…”

“…The holistic problem solving process (Kasser, 2013b) pages 284-285) is shown in Figure 4. Unlike the traditional approach to problem-solving which begins with a problem and ends with a solution, the holistic approach takes a wider perspective and begins with an undesirable situation (Schön, 1991) at some time (t 0 ) which has to be converted to a Feasible Conceptual Future Desired Situation (FCFDS).…”

“… Incorporates the seven principles for systems engineered solution systems (Kasser and Hitchins, 2011).  Provides a template incorporating built-in best practices that conform to the 'A' paradigm of systems engineering (Kasser, 2012).  Is a conceptual model since as the Temporal perspective shows, all the systems do not coexist at the same time.…”

“…Each of the nine systems must be viewed from each of the Holistic Thinking Perspectives (HTP) as appropriate (Kasser, 2013b). The Nine-System model is not shown in a single figure, instead perceptions from the following HTPs are provided:…”