Exploring prioritization through systematic literature surveys and case studies <s> Racheva et al. (2008) <s> Continuous customer-centric requirements reprioritization is essential in successfully performing agile software development. Yet, in the agile RE literature, very little is known about how agile reprioritization happens in practice. Generic conceptual models about this process are missing, which in turn, makes it difficult for both practitioners and researchers to reason about requirements decision-making at inter-iteration time. This paper presents a Grounded Theory study on agile requirements prioritization methods to yield a conceptual model for understanding the inter-iteration prioritization process in terms of inputs and outcomes. The latter is derived by using qualitative empirical data, published earlier by other authors. Such a conceptual model makes explicit the concepts that are used tacitly in different agile requirements prioritization methods and can be used for structuring future empirical investigations about this topic. <s> BIB001 </s> Exploring prioritization through systematic literature surveys and case studies <s> Racheva et al. (2008) <s> Requirements (re)prioritization is an essential mechanism of agile development approaches to maximize the value for the clients and to accommodate changing requirements. Yet, in the agile Requirements Engineering (RE) literature, very little is known about how agile (re)prioritization happens in practice. Conceptual models about this process are missing, which, in turn, makes it difficult for both practitioners and researchers to reason about requirements decision-making at inter-iteration time. We did a multiple case study on agile requirements prioritization methods to yield a conceptual model for understanding the inter-iteration prioritization process. The model is derived by using interview data from practitioners in 8 development organizations. Such a model makes explicit the concepts that are used tacitly in the agile requirements prioritization practice and can be used for structuring future empirical investigations about this topic, and for analyzing, supporting, and improving the process in real-life projects. <s> BIB002 </s> Exploring prioritization through systematic literature surveys and case studies <s> Racheva et al. (2008) <s> [Context & motivation] Requirements (re)prioritization is an essential mechanism of agile development approaches to maximize the value for the clients and to accommodate changing requirements. Yet, in the agile Requirements Engineering (RE) literature, very little is known about how agile (re)prioritization happens in practice. [Question/problem] To gain better understanding of prioritization practices, we analyzed the real-life processes as well as the guidance that the literature provides. We compare the results of a literature research with the results of a multiple case study that we used to create a conceptual model of the prioritization process. We set out to answer the research question: "Which concepts of agile prioritization are shared in practice and in literature and how they are used to provide guidance for prioritization." [Results] The case study yielded a conceptual model of the inter-iteration prioritization process. Further, we achieved a mapping between the concepts from the model and the existing prioritization techniques, described by several authors. [Contribution] The model contributes to the body of knowledge in agile RE. It makes explicit the concepts that practitioners tacitly use in the agile prioritization process. We use this for structuring the mapping study with the literature and plan to use it for analyzing, supporting, and improving the process in agile projects. The mapping gives us a clear understanding of the 'deviation' between the existing methods as prescribed in literature and the processes we observe in real life. It helps to identify which of the concepts are used explicitly by other authors/ methods. <s> BIB003 </s> Exploring prioritization through systematic literature surveys and case studies <s> Racheva et al. (2008) <s> The application of agile practices for requirements prioritization in distributed and outsourced projects is a relatively recent trend. Hence, not all of its facets are well-understood. This exploratory study sets out to uncover the concepts that practitioners in a large software organization use in the prioritization process and the practices that they deem good. We seek to provide a rich analysis and a deep understanding of three cases in an exploratory study that was carried out in a large and mature company, widely recognized for its excellence and its engagement in outsourced software development. We used in-depth interviews for data collection and grounded theory techniques for data analysis. Our exploration efforts yielded the following findings: (i) understanding requirements dependencies is of paramount importance for the successful deployment of agile approaches in large outsourced projects. (ii) Next to business value, the most important prioritization criterion in the setting of outsourced large agile projects is risk. (iii) The software organization has developed a new artefact that seems to be a worthwhile contribution to agile software development in the large: 'delivery stories', which complement user stories with technical implications, effort estimation and associated risk. The delivery stories play a pivotal role in requirements prioritization. (iv) The vendor's domain knowledge is a key asset for setting up successful client-developer collaboration. (v) The use of agile prioritization practices depends on the type of project outsourcing arrangement. Our findings contribute to the empirical software engineering literature by bringing a rich analysis of cases in agile and distributed contexts, from a vendor's perspective. We also discuss the possible implications of the results for research and in practice. <s> BIB004
The paper identified various issues in prioritization; factors governing and influencing the client's decision making during reprioritization are presented. Few solution strategies are also given by the authors 2. BIB001 Conceptual model of reprioritization is built on the basis of survey of literature. Factors influencing the reprioritization decision making are identified and is considered as a refined form of those identified earlier 3. BIB002 The conceptual model as created above is further refined as a result of interactions with the industry participants. This is because of the insights brought by the software development firms 4. BIB003 The conceptual models as created above are further refined as a result of more series of interviews with software development firms. "Dependencies" was the new factor to be added. These conceptual models are considered true reflections of industrial practices. The seven identified factors are searched in the prioritization description in literature to identify gaps. These gaps provide future directions for research work 5. BIB004 Carried out a survey to uncover different aspects related to the process of prioritization at inter iteration time, i.e. reprioritization. This paper identified the different roles as played by different people at client and vendor side, reprioritization criteria's adopted, factors affecting manner reprioritization is carried out  Decision aspects reprioritization is not undertaken by organizations, but they do recognize the need for handling requirements. Staying in markets by reducing the development efforts (especially time and cost) is one of the criteria that make them reluctant for reprioritizing already prioritized requirements. This aims to get insight into prioritization and reprioritization of both decision aspects and requirements. Updated documentation is another finding of the case study The area of reprioritization is explored to finer levels by interactions with organizations that had been using agile and non agile models from the time since back. The interactions should only focus around reprioritization Although the presented case study had been done with mass market software development organizations and had flavoured the tastes of both agile as well as non agile software developments 2.  Technique for performing reprioritization of new, changed and delayed requirements Not evaluated on real case studies May not be suitable for reprioritization of pairwise comparison based requirements beyond some value of a number of requirements 3.  Technique to perform reprioritization of pairwise compared requirements with minimal efforts It has good coverage of requirement set and involves minimal pairwise comparisons Should be extended to reprioritize decision aspects Should be executed on evolutionary software with thousands of requirements and continuous flood of requirements 4. Kukreja and Boehm (2013) This paper provides a two step process model for performing prioritization and reprioritization. Reprioritization is facilitated by automatic re-computation of requirement priorities by changing the priorities of parent MMF as per changing business environment Techniques not evaluated on real mass market situations like ever increasing requirements, aspects and stakeholders requirements with minimal efforts, i.e. free from scalability problem. • There are no guidelines/results that could help in decision making for selection of particular prioritization technique for performing reprioritization. The remaining papers (given in Table 4 ) present reprioritization techniques that need to be evaluated on real software so that their response against large requirement sets and large number of clients could be evaluated. RQ 2. How is reprioritization carried out by mass market software industries? Table 3 shows the generic process for performing reprioritization without reference to the mass market development. The reference to mass market situations, large stakeholders, requirements etc. are missing for the models. Table 4 gives generic techniques for performing reprioritization which may or may not be applicable for mass market developments after numbers of increments. In  and Kukreja and Boehm (2013) are the two techniques evaluated on real software but not at higher values of requirements. These techniques can be considered as mass market techniques with the requirement of stronger evaluations at higher values of inputs. The techniques as given by  and Kukreja and Boehm (2013) were based on performing reprioritization with an aim of minimization of parameter like efforts. RQ 3. How do the current reprioritization activities handle flood of requirements in mass market development situations?  and Kukreja and Boehm (2013) could be considered as mass market techniques but need strong evaluations. The authors of both the papers have not discussed that how their techniques are well acceptable against flood of requirements. RQ 4. How is the dynamism in the priorities of decision aspects handled in mass market developments? None of the technique relates itself with reprioritization of decision aspects. The techniques are specially mentioned for requirements and their applicability for reprioritization of decision aspects is still an unaddressed issue. Hence the literature survey is unable to reveal any work related to reprioritization of decision aspects. The Overall literature lacks reprioritization methods. The work that could be identified in the literature does not get mapped to the practical realities of mass market developments like large requirements, stakeholders and aspects. The above synthesized observations are presented in Table 5 . Table 5 excludes the case study work given in  because it does not provide any new reprioritization technique.