Requirements prioritisation: an experiment on exhaustive pair-wise comparisons versus planning game partitioning

Karlsson, Linda; Berander, Patrik; Regnell, Björn; Wohlin, Claes

doi:10.1049/ic:20040407

Cited by 42 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This problem of applying AHP in practice has also been recognized in previous research; see e.g. (Weil and Apostolakis 2001;Karlsson et al 2004). However, it has also been emphasized that in high-tech industrial projects, in which larger numbers of requirements have to be prioritized, the application of AHP could be valuable and should be investigated further in case studies (Karlsson et al 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

“…(Weil and Apostolakis 2001;Karlsson et al 2004). However, it has also been emphasized that in high-tech industrial projects, in which larger numbers of requirements have to be prioritized, the application of AHP could be valuable and should be investigated further in case studies (Karlsson et al 2004). The overall lesson learned with regard to AHP is that priorities regarding software quality attributes can be made explicitly and quantitatively by the software developers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To solve this type of problem, the benefits of MCDM techniques have already been addressed several times in the software industry, see e.g. (Karlsson et al 1998(Karlsson et al , 2004, Zhu et al 2005). To strive at a solution for the problems at CAMS the second research subject has been defined as:…”

Section: Problem Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over the years, AHP has been applied and validated in a variety of application domains, both in general business domains, such as BPR decision-making (Mansar et al 2009), the prioritization of infrastructural projects (Karydas and Gifun 2006), and also in the software application domain, e.g. in an evaluation of methods for prioritizing software requirements (Karlsson et al 1998), and an experiment on the comparison of prioritization techniques (Karlsson et al 2004). In these publications, AHP is mentioned as the most promising and trustworthy approach for establishing priorities in software development, although AHP is time-consuming.…”

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quality specification and metrication, results from a case-study in a mission-critical software domain

Trienekens

Kusters

Brussel³

2010

Software Qual J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software quality is of increasing importance in mission-critical embedded software systems. Due to the fast growing complexity and accompanying risks of failures of these systems, software quality needs to be addressed explicitly by software developers, preferably with a systematic method for an optimal implementation of software qualities, such as reliability, time-behavior and usability. At the Centre of Automation of Missioncritical Systems (CAMS) of the Dutch Royal Navy, a new approach has been defined for software developers to improve the way that they deal with software quality in the process of mission-critical systems engineering. The stepwise approach is based on both an international quality standard for software product quality, i.e. ISO9126, and on MultiCriteria Decision Making techniques, i.e. analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The stepwise approach has been validated in a case study. In particular, the tailoring of the ISO9126 standard toward the specific CAMS development situation, and the applicability of AHP techniques, from the perspective of software developers, has been investigated. The case study is carried out in a representative software development project, i.e. the software for combat management systems (CMS) of warships. Results of the case study show that software developers can explicitly deal with quality on the basis of both the ISO9126 standard and the AHP techniques, respectively regarding the specification, prioritization and metrication of software product quality.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Problem Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quality specification and metrication, results from a case-study in a mission-critical software domain

Trienekens

Kusters

Brussel³

2010

Software Qual J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After initial screening, requirements have to be prioritized, interdependencies need to be defined, and cost estimations have to be established in order for the selection process to take place. Several methods for attaining requirement priority exist, including AHP [50], the 100-point method [51], triage [52,53], attainment [54], negotiation [55], and the planning-game [56]. Prioritization can be performed by customers and/or customer representatives, as well as by internal experts from marketing and product management.…”

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Requirements engineering: In search of the dependent variables

Gorschek

Davis

2008

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When software development teams modify their requirements engineering process as an independent variable, they often examine the implications of these process changes by assessing the quality of the products of the requirements engineering process, e.g., a software requirements specification (SRS). Using the quality of the SRS as the dependent variable is flawed. As an alternative, this paper presents a framework of dependent variables that serves as a full range for requirements engineering quality assessment. In this framework, the quality of the SRS itself is just the first level. Other higher, and more significant levels, include whether the project was successful and whether the resulting product was successful. And still higher levels include whether or not the company was successful and whether there was a positive or negative impact on society as a whole.

show abstract

Introduction of a process maturity model for market‐driven product management and requirements engineering

Gorschek

Gomes²,

Pettersson³

et al. 2011

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY The area of software product development of software intensive products has received much attention, especially in the area of requirements engineering and product management. Many companies are faced with new challenges when operating in an environment where potential requirements number in thousands or even tens of thousands, and where a product does not have a customer, but any number of customers or markets. The development organization carries not only all the costs of development, but also takes all the risks. In this environment traditional bespoke requirements engineering, together with traditional process assessment and improvement models fall short as they do not address the unique challenges of a market‐driven environment. This paper introduces the Market‐driven Requirements Engineering Process Model, aimed at enabling process improvement and process assurance for organizations faced with these new challenges. The model is also validated in the industry through three case studies where the model is used for process assessment and improvement suggestion. Initial results show that the model is appropriate for process improvement for organizations operating in a market‐driven environment. In addition, the model was designed to be light weight in terms of low cost and thus adapted not only for large organizations but suitable for small and medium enterprises as well. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Requirements prioritisation: an experiment on exhaustive pair-wise comparisons versus planning game partitioning

Cited by 42 publications

References 17 publications

Quality specification and metrication, results from a case-study in a mission-critical software domain

Quality specification and metrication, results from a case-study in a mission-critical software domain

Requirements engineering: In search of the dependent variables

Introduction of a process maturity model for market‐driven product management and requirements engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About