On Modelers Ability to Build a Visual Diagram from a User Story Set: A Goal-Oriented Approach

Wautelet, Yves; Velghe, Mattijs; Heng, Samedi; Poelmans, Stephan; Kolp, Manuel

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-77243-1_13

Cited by 19 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the basis of the conducted experiment, difficulties that the modeler faces when building a RT with basic support were identified but overall the test subjects produced models of satisfying quality. The experiment of Wautelet et al [11] can be seen as preliminary to the one conducted in this paper. We indeed here also guide subjects into the tagging of US elements and build a RT out of US sets.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Wautelet et al [11] made an experiment using the unified model of [9] for tagging the elements of the WHO, WHAT and WHY dimensions of a US; each tag representing a concept with an inherent nature and defined granularity. Once tagged, the US elements were graphically represented by building one or more RTs.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The subjects received information about the context of the application development in company X together with a second set of US. Based on a study by Wautelet et al [11], the test subjects had to execute the following steps to model a RT (see the experiment document in the Appendix F for group 1 and Appendix H for group 2):…”

Section: Assignment and Measured Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating the Impact of User Stories Quality on the Ability to Understand and Structure Requirements

Wautelet¹,

Gielis²,

Poelmans³

et al. 2019

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scrum is driven by user stories (US). The development team indeed uses, to fill the project's and the sprints' backlog, sentences describing the user expectations with respect to the software. US are often written "on the fly" in structured natural language so their quality and the set's consistency are not ensured. The Quality User Story (QUS) framework intends to evaluate and improve the quality of a given US set. Other independent research has built a unified model for tagging the elements of the WHO, WHAT and WHY dimensions of a US; each tag representing a concept with an inherent nature and granularity. Once tagged, the US elements can be graphically represented through an icon and the modeler can link them when inter-dependencies are identified to build one or more Rationale Trees (RT). This paper presents the result of an experiment conducted with novice modelers aimed to evaluate how well they are able to build a RT out of (i) a raw real-life US set (group 1) and (ii) a new version of the US set improved in quality using QUS (group 2). The experiment requires test subjects to identify the nature of US elements and to graphically represent and link them. The QUS-compliant US set improved the ability of the test subjects to make this identification and linking. We cannot conclude that the use of the QUS framework improved the understanding of the problem/solution domain but when a QUS-compliant US set is used to build a RT, it increases the ability of modelers to identify Epic US. Building a RT thus has a positive impact on identifying the structure of a US set's functional elements.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assignment and Measured Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the Impact of User Stories Quality on the Ability to Understand and Structure Requirements

Wautelet¹,

Gielis²,

Poelmans³

et al. 2019

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This section is devoted to the evaluation and comparison of the students' drawn artifacts. We used two evaluation methods to assess the RT diagrams: The first one (the Three Criteria evaluation method [11]) consisted of the evaluation of three main criteria namely completeness, conformity and accuracy. A score was allocated to each model element and link identified in each of the RT diagrams reproduced by the respondents.…”

Section: Evaluation Methods For the Students' Artifacts And Validation Of The Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In essence, this visually-aided method aims to recognize and reduce any occurring modeling redundancies during the stages of requirements' analysis and design at the start of a software development project. The Rationale Tree was introduced theoretically in [10]; it was applied on real life cases in [8] and its ability as a stand-alone method to improve the understanding of user stories' set has been tested on novice modelers in [6,11]. On the other hand, User Story Mapping [3] is an industry-adopted user stories' structuring method based on listing, under the scope of an epic user story, all of the related lower-level functions described in ordinary user stories.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Software Problem Representation on the Basis of Rationale Trees and User Story Maps: Premises of an Experiment

Tsilionis

Maene

Heng

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

User stories describe system requirements from the users' point of view using structured natural language. These artifacts mostly assist the development team in agile projects where sets of them express the expected features of the to-be software. Nevertheless, when faced with large user stories' sets, further structuring needs to be introduced to make the software problem more understandable/clear. Indeed, the latter can hardly be understood on the basis of huge flat lists of sentences. The present paper describes the premises of an experiment destined to evaluate whether novice modelers can understand the requirements problem better through a visual representation (called Rationale Tree) built out of a user stories' set. It does so by comparing, on the same objective, the Rationale Tree method to the industry-adopted User Story Mapping technique with a modeling exercise. This was performed with the participation of two student groups where one used the former technique while the other one employed the latter. The ultimate goal of this exercise is to identify the actual performance of the Rational Tree in delivering understandability to the requirements problem (when input is provided in the form of a complex user stories' set) in order to identify possible bottlenecks and improvement opportunities within the method itself.

show abstract

Conceptual Modeling Versus User Story Mapping: Which is the Best Approach to Agile Requirements Engineering?

Tsilionis

Maene

Heng

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On Modelers Ability to Build a Visual Diagram from a User Story Set: A Goal-Oriented Approach

Cited by 19 publications

References 8 publications

Evaluating the Impact of User Stories Quality on the Ability to Understand and Structure Requirements

Evaluating the Impact of User Stories Quality on the Ability to Understand and Structure Requirements

Evaluating the Software Problem Representation on the Basis of Rationale Trees and User Story Maps: Premises of an Experiment

Conceptual Modeling Versus User Story Mapping: Which is the Best Approach to Agile Requirements Engineering?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About