20141205 - Elicitation
Transcript of 20141205 - Elicitation
© Fraunhofer IESE
2
AGENDA
Objectives & Problems wrt. Elicitation
Stakeholder Analysis
Communication Issues
Interviews & Interview Effects
Other Elicitation Techniques
Summary
© Fraunhofer IESE
4
Objectives of the Eliciting Phase
Knowledge acquisition (Elicitation, Acquisition)
About involved persons and objectives
Tasks
Current state
Expectations
Domain
© Fraunhofer IESE
5
Common Problems of Elicitation
Consideration of all stakeholders
Communication
Stakeholders can not describe abstractly what they are doing, why they are doing it nor what they need to be able to do things.
Requests are much too general
Presentation of new possibilities and their consequences
Stakeholder like to stick to their old avenues of approach
Conflicts
Cause of power struggles
Cause of opposition against changes
Priorities/Changes
Stakeholders want too much
Stakeholders always add new ideas
© Fraunhofer IESE
6
Stakeholders
Stakeholders are people who have an interest in the product
they built it
they use it
they manage it
they are in some way affected by the use
© Fraunhofer IESE
8
Stakeholder Elicitation by Means of Stakeholder Analyses
A multitude of very diverse stakeholders are involved in the development of a product or in a project
Goal: Identification of all potential product and process stakeholders
Which of these stakeholders might be influenced positively and which negatively by a decision made during the project?
Goal: Elicitation of the interests of all stakeholders, their importance, and their influence within the project, as well as identification of their relationships among each other
© Fraunhofer IESE
9
Benefit
Identification of …
… the interests of all stakeholders who may influence the project or be influenced by the project
… potential conflicts and risks that may jeopardize the project
… possible opportunities and alternatives that may have a positive influence on the project
… groups whose participation in the project must be promoted actively
… decisions that may reduce or even eliminate negative effects on weak or vulnerable groups
© Fraunhofer IESE
10
Stakeholder Identification
Stakeholder Interests in the Project
Developer High productivity, error avoidance, little rework
Marketing Sales High sales figures, increased customer satisfaction
Project Management Budget reduction, adherence to schedule
Investor Shorter time to market, faster workflows
Customer, User Easier workflow, usability
© Fraunhofer IESE
11
Importance and Influence of a Stakeholder
Stakeholder Importance Influence
Developer 2 4
Sales 3 2
Manager 4 4
Investor 5 3
Customer 5 1
A stakeholder‘s influencecorresponds to his power to positively or negatively influence decisions and activities during a project.
A stakeholder‘s importancecorresponds to the priority that must be assigned to the fulfillment of his requirements and interests.
© Fraunhofer IESE
12
Importance
Influence
A B
C D
1
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
e.g., User
e.g., Customer
e.g., Project Manager
e.g., Developer
e.g., Support Service
© Fraunhofer IESE
13
Quadrant A
Stakeholders with high importance for the project, but with little influence on concrete development activities.
e.g., user, customer
Require special initiatives for protecting their interests
Continuously monitor the fulfillment and validity of their goals
Promote their involvement in the development, e.g., prototype workshops, review meetings
Name person responsible for the project in order to monitor the initiatives
Importance
Influence
A B
C D1
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
© Fraunhofer IESE
14
Quadrant B
Stakeholders with high importance for the project, and with strong influence on concrete development activities
e.g., project manager
High communication and synchronization effort needed between the stakeholders in this group
Common understanding and agreement about decisions must be guaranteed for the whole time
Importance
Influence
A B
C D1
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
© Fraunhofer IESE
15
Quadrant C
Stakeholders with low importance for the project, and with little influence on concrete development activities.
e.g., maintenance personnel, hotline service
Still, their interests should not be neglected completely, since they are project and product stakeholders after all, e.g., handbooks, training, etc.
Periodically communicate information about project or product decisions
Importance
Influence
A B
C D1
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
© Fraunhofer IESE
16
Quadrant D
Stakeholders with low importance for the project, and with strong influence on concrete development activities.
e.g., developer, quality assurance
Possible “project killers“
Are able to block the continuation of the project and jeopardize its success
Need permanent and intensive involvement in decision-making activities by being given rationales and explanations
Acceptance regarding decisions must be achieved
Importance
Influence
A B
C D1
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
© Fraunhofer IESE
17
Stakeholder Onion Model
In the middle: the product or service under development.
System: (normal) operators, maintenance operators, and support operators.
Containing system: direct functional beneficiaries, i.e., those stakeholders who profit from
the services the systems offers. Wider environment: financial beneficiaries, i.e., stakeholders who have an interest in a
properly running system (as it generates money), (stakeholders with an indirect interest in the system).
Negative stakeholders: peaceful opposition (e.g., competitors), directly hostile stakeholders
(e.g., car thieves).
© Fraunhofer IESE
20
Communication Flows
Objective Reality Perceived Reality
Perception
Expression
Representation Interpretation
Result
Stakeholder Requirements Engineer
© Fraunhofer IESE
21
Overview of Elicitation Techniques [Lauesen 2002]
Stakeholder analysis(Group) interviewObservation/Síte visitsTask demoDocument studiesQuestionnairesBrainstormingFocus groupsUI Workshops
PrototypingPilot experiments
Similar companiesSuppliers
NegotiationRisk AnalysisCost/benefitGoal-domain analysisDomain-requirements
Pres
ent
wo
rkPr
esen
t p
rob
lem
sC
riti
cal i
ssu
es/g
oal
s
Futu
re s
yste
m id
eas
Rea
listi
c p
oss
ibili
ties
Co
nse
qu
ence
s &
Ris
ks
Co
mm
itm
ent
Co
nfl
ict
reso
luti
on
Req
uir
emen
ts
Prio
riti
esC
om
ple
ten
ess
Things toelicit
Techniques
g v p p g g pv v g p pv g p gv v g p gv g p gg g p
v pv v v g p p v
p v g p g p v
p v g g v gp v v v g g g
p g v v v gp p g v g g
p g p p p v v g vg g v p
g v p p v p vg v g p v g p g g vp g p v g g
p = possibleg = goodv = very good
© Fraunhofer IESE
22
Type of Interview (1)
Differ in the degree of formality
Open Interview
Open questions
Difficult to analyze the results
Requires good interview skill
Personality influences the results
Semi structured Interview
Guided by predefined interview questions
Structured by predefined topics
Open space for spontaneous extensions/variation
© Fraunhofer IESE
23
Type of Interview (2)
Differ in the degree of formality
Structured Interview
High degree of objectivity
Easy to compare results between different interviews
Allow quantitative evaluation
No freedom for the interview, very narrow
© Fraunhofer IESE
24
Interviews
Preparation
Insight of documents (e.g. Scenarios, previous work documents)
Prepare questions (with at least 1 domain expert)
Performance
Twosome as possible (one asking questions, one taking notes)
Maybe recording on tape
Analysis
Composition of answers
Written feedback by participants interview
Maybe further interviews
© Fraunhofer IESE
25
Interview Performance (1)
Introduction
What is the interview good for
What is happening with the answers
The questionnaire
Often very general, then more specific
Mixture of open and closed questions
Active listening! (esp. paraphrasing)
Keep an eye on non-verbal communication
Prevent typical mistakes:
Deviation of the interviewed person
Answers too general
Uneasy atmosphere (noise, interruptions, etc.)
© Fraunhofer IESE
26
Interview Performance (2)
Finish
How is the first impression
How will it go on
Interviewed person has the final say
© Fraunhofer IESE
27
Interview Effect - Rosenthal Effect
Biased expectancies can essentially effect reality and create self-fulfilling prophecies as a result.
Interviewee try to please the interviewer.
© Fraunhofer IESE
28
Interview Effect - Social Desirability
Do you smoke <10,
10-20 or >20 cigarettes ?Fair average!
Ähm... 15!
When we know that other people are watching us, we will tend to behave in a way we believe is socially acceptable.
© Fraunhofer IESE
29
Interview Effect - Halo Effect
An individual quality serves to bias the judgment of other qualities.Attractive people are often judged as having a more desirable personality and more skills than someone of average appearance.
Attractive= rich= intelligent
© Fraunhofer IESE
30
Interview Effect - Recency- Effect
A recent stimuli/observations/Experience has influence on the next.
Given a list of items to remember, we will tend to remember the last few things more than those things in the middle.
© Fraunhofer IESE
31
Interview Effect - Sponsorship Bias
Influenced response of interviewees where they know the interviewers goal.
Will they reduce the man power of our department ?
Is this effective?
Views and opinions are not expressed as freely (often unconsciously) and interviewees may deliberate about appropriate and acceptable answers.
© Fraunhofer IESE
33
Focus Group
Special form of workshop (6-8 participants)
Professional moderator
Start with problems
e.g. map collection, flipchart
Collect reasons
Then focus on optimal solution
But not only opposites of the problems
Collect reasons, too
© Fraunhofer IESE
34
Prototyping (1)
Prototyping helps to detect hidden and not yet mentioned requirements of clients and users
“…but I had something different in mind”
Kinds of prototypes
Demonstration prototype
For identification of user tasks
Decision prototype
For evaluation of alternatives
Learn prototype / For better comprehension of a problem (or new techniques)
© Fraunhofer IESE
35
Prototyping (2)
Prototypes can be very different
Paper prototypes e.g. graphical user interfaces
“Wizard of Oz” Prototype Development of a graphical user interface (GUI), but input will be
sent directly to an operator, who is simulating the systems behaviourand who is producing the appropriate output.
Software prototypes e.g. realized in Visual Basic
Other terms: Wire Frames; mock-ups; high-fidelity; low-fidelity
© Fraunhofer IESE
36
Site Visits (1)
Observation of stakeholders in their environment
Can be done by observer, camera or computer monitoring
Objectives are
Identify fundamental knowledge, that nobody else is going to utter (implicit knowledge)
Find hidden requirements / causes
Originate a better understanding for the real situation on the side of the requirements engineers
Suitable for the development of new products; new market segments
© Fraunhofer IESE
37
Site Visits (2)
1-2 interviews per day and team Analysis of data within 48 h, team debriefing very important Disadvantage:
Large amounts of irrelevant data; Time consuming
Only observation of as-is situation and possible problems
© Fraunhofer IESE
38
Other Methods / Sources for Information
Analysis of existing documents
Analysis of competitor’s products
“Creation” of requirements in the sense of creativity workshops
© Fraunhofer IESE
39
Creativity in Requirements Engineering
At least of the same importance is the activity of idea or requirementsgeneration in addition to requirements elicitation!
Ideas of technical nature (e.g., new features) as well as in terms of quality(make system more efficient) or organization (how to improve businessprocesses) are needed for successful system development
Creativity Techniques can be used during requirements elicitation tocreate these ideas.
© Fraunhofer IESE
40
The 5 Components of Creativity Workshops
SkilledModerator
IdeaGenerator: Customer
IdeaEvaluator(Benefit): Customer
IdeaGenerator:
Tech. Competence
IdeaEvaluator
(Feasibility/Scope): Tech. Competence
© Fraunhofer IESE
41
Principles of Creativity
Preexistingassociations
Newassociations
Free associationStruct. associationIntuition triggered
Concept formationAbstractionReductionAnalysisArgumentationConfrontationEmpirical eval.
AlienationAnalogyInductionTransferAdaptionAnalysisAbstractionReduction
InferenceReformulationForgetting Transformation Combination
Evaluation
Exploration
© Fraunhofer IESE
45
Anonymous Voting
Assumption Surfacing
Attribute Listing
Backward Forward Planning
Boundary Examination
Boundary Relaxation
Brain Sketching
Brainstorming
Brainwriting
Brainwriting 6-3-5
Brainwriting Game
Brainwriting Pool
Browsing
Brutethink
Bug Listing
Bullet Proofing
Bunches of Bananas
Card Story Boards
Cartoon Story Board
CATWOE
Causal Mapping
Charrette
Cherry Split
Chunking
Circle of Opportunity
Clarification
Classic Brainstorming
Collective Notebook (CNB)
Comparison Tables
Component Detailing
Concepts Fan
Consensus Mapping
Constrained Brainwriting
Contradiction Analysis
Controlling Imagery
Crawford Slip Writing
Creative Problem Solving (CPS)
Criteria for Idea-finding Potential
Critical Path Diagrams (CPD)
Decision Seminar
Delphi
Dialectical approaches
Dimensional Analysis
Disney Creativity Strategy
DO IT
Drawing
Estimate-Discuss-Estimate
Exaggeration
Excursions
Factors in Selling Ideas
False Faces
Fishbone Diagram
Five W's and H
Flow Charts
Focus Groups
Focusing
Force-Field Analysis
Force-Fit Game
Free Association
Fresh Eye
Gallery Method
Gap Analysis
Goal Orientation
Greetings Cards
Help-Hinder
Heuristic Ideation Technique (HIT)
Highlighting
Idea Advocate
Idea Card Method - Brainwriting
Ideal Final Result
Imagery for Answering Questions
Imagery Manipulation
Imaginary Brainstorming
Implementation Checklists
Improved Nominal Group Technique
Interpretive Structural Modeling
Keeping a Dream Diary
Kepner and Tregoe Method
KJ-Method
Laddering
Lateral Thinking
Listing 204
Listing Pros and Cons
Metaplan Information Market
Mind Mapping
Morphological Analysis
Morphological Forced Connections
Multiple Redefinition
Negative Brainstorming
NLP
Nominal Group Technique (NGT)
Nominal-Interacting Technique
Notebook
Observer and Merged Viewpoints
Osborn's Checklist
Other Peoples Definitions
Other Peoples Viewpoints
Paired Comparison
Panel Consensus
Paraphrasing Key Words
Personal Balance-Sheet
Phases of Integrated Problem Solving (PIPS)
Pictures as Idea Triggers
Pin Cards
PMI (Plus, Minus, Interaction)
Plan Do Check Act (PDCA)
Plusses, Potentials and Concerns
Potential-Problem Analysis (PPA)
Preliminary Questions
Problem-Centred Leadership (PCL)
Problem Inventory Analysis (PIA)
Problem Reversal
Progressive Hurdles
Progressive Revelation
Provocation
Q-sort
Quality Circles
Random Stimuli
Rawlinson Brainstorming
Receptivity to Ideas
Reframing Values
Relational Words
Relaxation
Reversals 268
Rolestorming
SCAMMPERR
SCAMPER
Sculptures
Search Conference
Sequential-Attributes Matrix
Seven-Step Model
Similarities and Differences
Simple Rating Methods
Simplex
Six Thinking Hats
Slice and Dice
Snowball Technique
Stakeholder Analysis
Sticking Dots
Stimulus Analysis
Story Writing
Strategic Assumption Testing
Strategic Choice Approach
Strategic Management Process
Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA)
Successive Element Integration
Super Group
Super Heroes
SWOT Analysis
Synectics 306
Systematized Direct Induction (SDI)
Technology Monitoring
Think Tank
Thril
TILMAG
Transactional Planning
Trigger Method
Trigger Sessions
TRIZ
Using Crazy ideas
Using Experts
Value Brainstorming
Value Engineering
Visualizing a Goal
Who are you?
Why Why Why (repeatable questions)
Wishing
Working with Dreams and Images
List of Creativity Techniques
© Fraunhofer IESE
53
Elicitation Summary
Interview More time consuming Requires explicit integration of standpoints Allows better adaptation on background of the interviewed person
Workshop/Focus Group Frequently used technique Relative little expenditure of time Fundament for team creation Rational for requirements/conflicts can be discussed Problems with social structures, focus on hot spots
Observations/Site Visits Good for capturing As-Is Situation Least impact of presumptions
Creativity Techniques Help to “Generate” ideas & requirements