The various influences in the processes and application domains make requirements engineering (RE) inherently complex and difficult to implement. In general, we have two options for establishing an RE approach: We can either establish an activity-based RE approach, or we can establish an artefact-based one where project participants concentrate on the RE artefacts rather than on the way of creating them. While a number of activity-based RE approaches have been proposed in recent years, we have gained much empirical evidence and experiences about the advantages of the artefact-based paradigm for RE. However, artefact orientation is still a young paradigm with various interpretations and practical manifestations whereby we need a clear understanding of its basic concepts and a consolidated and evaluated view on the paradigm. In this article, we contribute an artefact-based approach to RE [artefact model for domain-independent RE (AMDiRE)] that emerges from 6 years of experiences in fundamental and evidence-based research. To this end, we first discuss the basic notion of artefact orientation and its evolution in recent years. We briefly introduce a set of artefact-based RE models we developed in industrial research cooperations for different application domains and show their empirical evaluations and their dissemination into academia and practice, eventually leading to the AMDiRE approach. We conclude with a discussion of experiences we made during the development and different industrial evaluations, and lessons learnt.
Although the importance of a well-defined artefact model is recognised in the area of activity orientation @cite_51 , the definition of artefacts, their contents, and especially their dependencies is not in scope of available approaches. @cite_41 discovered that only 50 Considering the absence of strong empirical work in the area of activity orientation @cite_42 and, thus, following a purely argumentative line of reasoning, activity-oriented approaches still have difficulties to overcome the problem of providing a means to support a flexible RE process that guides the creation of consistent RE artefacts. In contrast, when following the principles of , we are supposed to define an RE reference model by defining the artefacts, their contents, and their dependencies rather than dictating the way of creating the artefacts, thus, supporting flexibility in the process and the creation of detailed, consistent RE artefacts. First evidence for the benefits of artefact orientation is provided by industrial case studies that evaluate both paradigms in a comparative manner, e.g. @cite_14 (see also Sect. ).
@cite_41 @cite_14 @cite_42 @cite_51
1973931357 2121843002 2963686848 1599980315
[Background:] Nowadays, industries are facing the problem that the Requirements Engineering (RE) process is highly volatile, since it depends on project influences from the customer's domain or from process models used. Artefact-based approaches promise to provide guidance in the creation of consistent artefacts in volatile project environments, because these approaches concentrate on the artefacts and their dependencies, instead of prescribing processes. Yet missing, however, is empirical evidence on the advantages of applying artefact-based RE approaches in real projects. [Aim:] We developed a customisable artefact-based RE approach for the domain of business information systems. Our goal is to investigate the advantages and limitations of applying this customisable approach in an industrial context. [Method:] We conduct a case study with our artefact-based RE approach and its customisation procedure. For this, we apply it at a software development project at Siemens following the steps of the customisation procedure. We assess our approach in direct comparison with the previously used RE approach considering possible improvements in the process and in the quality of the produced artefacts. [Results:] We show that our approach is flexible enough to respond to the individual needs in the analysed project environment. Although the approach is not rated to be more productive, we find an improvement in the syntactic and the semantic quality of the created artefacts. [Conclusions:] We close a gap in the RE literature by giving empirical evidence on the advantages of artefact orientation in RE in an industrial setting. Requirements Engineering (RE) processes are highly volatile due to dependencies on customers' capabilities or used process models, both complicating a standardised RE process. A promising solution is given by artefactorientation that emphasises the results rather than dictating a strict development process. At such a basis one is able to incorporate domain-specific methods for producing artefacts without having to take into account the variability of process definitions. Although artefacts are known to support customisable development processes, there still is no common agreement about the structure and semantics of artefact-based methodologies. In this paper we discuss different interpretations of the term artefact considering aspects like process integration capabilities and necessities within individual project environments. We contribute a meta model for artefact-orientation that is inferred from two RE models elaborated within industrial cooperation projects of our research group. We conclude with a discussion of performed case studies and ongoing work. Abstract Context For many years, we have observed industry struggling in defining a high quality requirements engineering (RE) and researchers trying to understand industrial expectations and problems. Although we are investigating the discipline with a plethora of empirical studies, they still do not allow for empirical generalisations. Objective To lay an empirical and externally valid foundation about the state of the practice in RE, we aim at a series of open and reproducible surveys that allow us to steer future research in a problem-driven manner. Method We designed a globally distributed family of surveys in joint collaborations with different researchers and completed the first run in Germany. The instrument is based on a theory in the form of a set of hypotheses inferred from our experiences and available studies. We test each hypothesis in our theory and identify further candidates to extend the theory by correlation and Grounded Theory analysis. Results In this article, we report on the design of the family of surveys, its underlying theory, and the full results obtained from Germany with participants from 58 companies. The results reveal, for example, a tendency to improve RE via internally defined qualitative methods rather than relying on normative approaches like CMMI. We also discovered various RE problems that are statistically significant in practice. For instance, we could corroborate communication flaws or moving targets as problems in practice. Our results are not yet fully representative but already give first insights into current practices and problems in RE, and they allow us to draw lessons learnt for future replications. Conclusion Our results obtained from this first run in Germany make us confident that the survey design and instrument are well-suited to be replicated and, thereby, to create a generalisable empirical basis of RE in practice. This article presents a model for projects that have to adhere to Enterprise Architecture (EA) in order for their results to be aligned with the broader organization. The model features project artifacts (i.e. deliverables such as Software Architecture Documents), their mutual relationships, their relationship with EA, and the processes in which they are created and tested on conformance. We start with applying Activity Theory to show the crucial mediating role that artifacts have in projects and to identify and justify the new EA-related artifacts we introduce. We subsequently incorporate these findings and existing best practices in a standard systems development approach in order to create a practical model that projects can apply for EA conformance. This model features both new, dedicated EA artifacts, and well-known existing artifacts of which we describe the way they should conform to EA. Finally, two action research studies are used to empirically support the model.