Value-Driven V-Model: From Requirements Analysis to Acceptance Testing

Abstract

SUMMARYThe goal of software testing should go beyond simply finding defects. Ultimately, testing should be focused on increasing customer satisfaction. Defects that are detected in areas of the software that the customers are especially interested in can cause more customer dissatisfaction. If these defects accumulate, they can cause the software to be shunned in the marketplace. Therefore, it is important to focus on reducing defects in areas that customers consider valuable. This article proposes a valuedriven V-model (V 2 model) that deals with customer values and reflects them in the test design for increasing customer satisfaction and raising test efficiency. key words: V-model, test design, value-based software engineering, customer value, customer satisfaction

V‐model with fuzzy quality function deployments for mobile application development

“…However, prioritization does not always correspond to development efforts because some priorities may benefit from the availability of required technology. Compared with Han et al 6 's V‐model, the FQFD in the verification stages that have proven does not required to deliberate the trade‐off relationships between URs, and therefore, the relevant elicitation process is more straightforward. This attribute allows the proposed V‐model to reach faster decision on UR and SR as well as DSs and hence is more suitable for small mobile app with predefined application scope and user base.…”

“…However, agile method limitations necessitate active user iterations throughout development, accompanied by insufficient and unclear requirements, and difficulty in integration testing due to the iterative and incremental development approach 5 . Additionally, agile methods rely on people and their creativity rather than on processes for overcoming the problems of traditional software methodologies 6 . By defining structure and alignment in software development, the V‐model is frequently more advantageous than agile methods under these limitations.…”

“…The reason is the contemporary V‐model does not depict the process of collecting and eliciting user requirements (URs) 21 . The implications are losing focus on what customers deem valuable and poor customer satisfaction 6 . According to Dasanayake et al, 22 requirements define software architecture, and any suboptimal decision in this definition process can degrade system quality and cause problems later in the development process.…”

“…The decomposed elements are then used to help design test plans, and the identified priorities can be used to determine the project's focus. Unlike Han et al, 6 the deployment of FQFD does not necessitate the use of a complex method such as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to determine the weight of customer requirements. The remainder of the V‐model would ensure systematic fulfillment, programming, and validation of app specifications.…”

“…5 Additionally, agile methods rely on people and their creativity rather than on processes for overcoming the problems of traditional software methodologies. 6 By defining structure and alignment in software development, the V-model is frequently more advantageous than agile methods under these limitations.…”