Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J....
-
Upload
richard-lloyd -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J....
![Page 1: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study
Wes J. Lloyd
Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chairDr. Mary Beth Rosson, Co-chair
Dr. James D. ArthurDr. Doug A. Bowman
![Page 2: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 3: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 4: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Introduction Requirements Analysis
Defining product requirements Information gathered from interaction
with customer or users Ensures that the “right system” is built Detecting and correcting errors is more
economical during Requirements Analysis
![Page 5: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Cost Multiplier for Software Fixes From [6] Leffingwell, Managing Software Requirements
.1 - .2 Requirements Time
.5 Design Time
1 Coding
2 Unit Test
5 Acceptance test
20 Maintenance
![Page 6: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Why Distributed Requirements Engineering? Client request for on-site support Project members can not travel or
relocate Skilled workers not available Reduce travel / relocation costs Hardware, software resources only
available at certain locations
![Page 7: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Disadvantages of Distributed Software Engineering Coordination and versioning of work artifacts
(documents, code) across multiple sites No unplanned meetings Difficulty making contact with remote team Difficulty knowing whom to contact from
remote group Misunderstood priority of information
requests Language differences Time zone differences
![Page 8: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Groupware Time-Space groupware taxonomy Time-Space groupware taxonomy
Same TimeDifferent
Time
Same Place
Face-to-face Interaction
Meeting Works
Asynchronous Interaction
MOOsburg, Email
Different Places
Synchronous Distributed Interaction
Centra Symposium, MOOsburg
Asynchronous Distributed Interaction
MOOsburg, Email
![Page 9: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Research Goals
1) Assess SRS document quality Correlate factors that affected document
quality
2) Determine which Groupware Tools best support (DRE) Distributed Requirements Engineering
3) Determine which Requirements Elicitation Techniques work best for DRE
![Page 10: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 11: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
DRE Groupware: GBRAT Goal Based Requirements Analysis Tool
(GBRAT) [11] Georgia Tech
Specific to the Goal Based Requirements Analysis Method (GBRAM)
Software goals classification and organization method
Shared requirements repository Web interface Doesn’t support elicitation
![Page 12: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
DRE Groupware: FLARE Front Loaded Accurate
Requirements Engineering (FLARE) US Naval postgraduate school
Web based requirements repository
Descriptive video clips to give context
![Page 13: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
DRE Groupware: WinWin WinWin System [9]
Barry Boehm, University of Southern California Supports the WinWin Requirements Negotiation
Process Distributed multimedia archive of requirements
negotiation artifacts organized by domain Supports asynchronous distributed work Requires augmentation with other tools
Email Prototyping Audio/Video conferencing
![Page 14: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
DRE Groupware: TeamWave TeamWave
University of Calgary Graphical room-based collaborative
environment, similar to MOOSburg Daniela Herlea configured a
collaborative Requirements Engineering space using available collaborative tools
![Page 15: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 16: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
DRE Empirical Study CS5704 students role-play as
requirements engineers CS5734 students role-play as
customers GOAL: To specify a company wide
scheduling system
![Page 17: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Requirements Engineering Process
1) Capture high-level user requirements
2) Requirements elicitation, and analysis
3) Write the software requirements specification document (SRS)
4) Verification and revision of specification document
![Page 18: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Virtual Meetings Four planned formal sessions Meeting 1
Introduction, high level requirements
Meeting 2, 3 Requirements elicitation, management
Meeting 4 SRS review
![Page 19: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Centra Symposium
![Page 20: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Centra Symposium 1:many audio conferencing Application sharing Shared whiteboard Public, private synchronous chat Slideshow Voting Shared web browser
![Page 21: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
MOOsburg
![Page 22: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
MOOsburg Room based collaborative
environment Asynchronous and synchronous
collaboration Shared whiteboard Text chat File sharing Shared list editor
![Page 23: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Group List Server Messages distributed to all group
participants Asynchronous collaboration
![Page 24: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Requirements Elicitation Techniques Brainstorming / Idea Reduction Interviews Question and Answer Storyboards Use Cases Prototyping Questionnaires Requirements Management
![Page 25: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Customer Roles Secretary
Currently in charge of scheduling at the company
Concerned about ease of use and job security Engineer
Technical person with ideas for system features Very busy with customers
Vice President Primary concern is to keep project on budget Familiar with computer buzzwords, but not
their meaning
![Page 26: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Team Formation Requirements Engineers
Took Software Engineering/Programming experience survey
Attempted to balance teams based on experience
Customers Belbin Self-Perception Inventory used to
measure participant’s natural role tendencies.
Roles assigned based on role measurement
![Page 27: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Participant Instruction Groupware tutorial
Class session on use of Centra Symposium and MOOsburg
For requirements engineers, customers Requirements Engineering Tutorial
Class session on Requirements Engineering as applicable to the empirical study
For requirements engineers
![Page 28: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Distributed Meeting Facilities Lab facilities
Torgersen 3060 Torgersen New Media Center Lab
Networked Dell workstations with headset microphones
Centra Symposium, and MOOsburg client on all machines
![Page 29: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Data Collection Note taking of observations for all
virtual meetings Meetings recorded via Symposium
client Surveys
![Page 30: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Surveys Software engineering and programming
experience survey Requirements engineering experience
survey Post meeting #1 survey Post meeting #2, #3 requirements
engineer survey Requirements Engineer Peer participation
survey Final online survey
![Page 31: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 32: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
SRS Quality Measurement Overall SRS Quality is average of these four
metrics SRS Grade
Student assessment Professor impression of SRS document quality Assigned as a percentage
Document Evolution Measurement of SRS maturity Requirements are enumerated Requirements are classified as having evolution or not. Value is percentage of total requirements with
evolution
![Page 33: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
SRS Quality Measurement - 2
Requirements Evaluation Requirements are enumerated Requirements are classified based on
defect type. Ambiguous Incomplete Inconsistent Not Traceable Not Verifiable
Value is the percentage of defect-free requirements
![Page 34: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
SRS Quality Measurement - 3
Original Requirements Number of original requirements
supported is counted. Value is percentage of original
requirements supported
![Page 35: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 36: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
SRS Quality High Performance Groups
Low Performance Groups
Group 1 79.34 %
Group 2 77.32 %
Group 3 76.44 %
Group 5 75.96 %
Group 4 69.11 %
Group 6 66.85 %
![Page 37: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
SRS Quality
93.0%
72.7%
84.2%
67.6%
91.0%
72.7%
75.0%
70.6%
92.0%
87.5%
51.3%
75.0%
91.0%
84.1%
59.6%
69.1%
75.0%
78.1%
67.4%
55.9%
65.0%
77.2%
42.9%
82.4%
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
250%
300%
350%
Su
m o
f S
RS
Do
cum
ent
Met
rics
1 2 3 5 4 6Group
% of Total OriginalFunction Points
% of Requirementswithout Errors
% Requirements withEvolution
SRS Grade %
![Page 38: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
SRS Quality: Results Groups with less software engineering
experience produced higher quality SRS documents
r(df=4)=-.81, p < .05 Average SE experience scores for groups was lower
when SRS quality was higher.
Groups who reported lower effectiveness of requirements elicitation techniques produced higher quality SRS documents
r(df=4)=-.74, p < .09 Ineffectiveness of Prototyping and Questionnaires for
groups with high SRS quality create this trend.
![Page 39: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
SRS Quality: Results - 2 Groups who reported Symposium Text Chat as
a more effective tool produced lower quality SRS documents.
r(df=4)=-.73, p<.10) Groups with lower SRS quality used text chat more
frequently because of language barriers. Notably Groups 2 & 4
"some customers ( dure to their lack of english knowledge ) didn't participate in req process as much as they had to"
![Page 40: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
SRS Quality: Results - 3 Groups who obtained more information
using email tended to produce lower quality SRS documents. r(df=4)=-.64, p<.17) Low performance groups did not receive
enough feedback from virtual meetings and therefore relied on email for information gathering.
Poor planning for meetings Poor administration of meetings Language barriers with customer
![Page 41: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Additional SRS Quality Results Groups who perceived fellow group
members as contributing more to the group tended to produce higher quality SRS documents. (NS)
Groups having more experience with requirements elicitation techniques tended to produce higher quality SRS documents. (NS)
![Page 42: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 43: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Groupware Tool Effectiveness
4.38
3.19
1.92
4.73
2.73
2.31
1.19
1.58
1.12
3.15
1.65
1.15
0.88
4.62
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Co
mp
on
ent
Reported Effectiveness
Group List Server
MOOsburg Planner
MOOsburg List Editor
MOOsburg Web Links
MOOsburg Shared File
MOOsburg Whiteboard
MOOsburg Message Board
MOOsburg Text Chat
Symposium Application Sharing
Symposium Web Browser Sharing
Symposium Agenda/Slide Show
Symposium Whiteboard
Symposium Text Chat
Symposium Voice Conferencing
![Page 44: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
Groupware Tools: Results Usability and Configuration issues caused
participants not to use MOOsburg. No participants reported having meetings in
MOOsburg "I wouldn't use MOOsburg…, There were too many
issues with MOOsburg to list them all, but they include things such as navigatitability, awareness, chatting, file sharing, etc.“
"It's interface is intimidating. I'd probably start there and delve deeper over time.“
(MOOsburg issues are) "Length of time required to load. Performance over a dial-up connection."
![Page 45: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
Groupware Tools: Results - 2 Centra Symposium Whiteboard,
Agenda/Slideshow, Web Browser Sharing are useful tools when customers participate actively in the meeting
r(df=24)>.44, p<.025 Perceived Customer Participation correlates with
Centra groupware tool effectiveness
"Centra allowed us to have effective meetings. We could chat, share web-browsers, view their presentations. Without a tool like these meetings would have been just about impossible."
![Page 46: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Groupware Tools: Results - 3 Groupware tools in general are more
effective when customers participate actively in virtual meetings. r(df=24)=.49, p<.025 The average effectiveness of all groupware
tools is greater when perceived customer participation is higher.
![Page 47: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
Groupware Tools: Results - 4
Centra Symposium is more effective when customers participate more actively in virtual meetings. r(df=24)=.39, p<.05 Centra Symposium was rated as more
effective at supporting requirements analysis when perceived customer participation was higher.
![Page 48: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
Additional Groupware Tools Results Centra Symposium Text Chat may be a
useful tool when customers are not active in virtual meetings. (NS)
Asynchronous Tools (Group Email listserver, MOOsburg shared files) tended to be reported as being more effective when groups did not obtain enough information from virtual meetings. (NS)
![Page 49: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
Outline Introduction Background Project Overview Assessing SRS Quality Results and Conclusions
SRS Quality Groupware Tool Effectiveness Requirements Elicitation Techniques
Effectiveness
![Page 50: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
Requirements Elicitation Technique Effectiveness
4.50
3.19
3.81
3.46
1.62
2.65
4.31
3.69
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
Methods
Eff
ec
tiv
en
es
s
Q/A Method
Customer Interviews
Brainstorming / Idea Reduction
Storyboards
Prototyping
Questionnaires
Use Cases
Requirements Management
![Page 51: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Requirements Elicitation: Results Requirements Management is more
effective when the engineer(s) applying the method have more experience with it. r(df=24)=.30, p<.03
Brainstorming is an effective requirements analysis technique when participants are active in virtual meetings. r(df=44)=.30, p<.05
![Page 52: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52
Requirements Elicitation: Results - 2 Questionnaires tended to be more
effective requirements analysis technique when customers participate actively outside of virtual meetings. r(df=24)=.30, p<.14
![Page 53: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
53
Requirements Elicitation:Results - 3 Requirements Elicitation techniques in general
are more effective when customers participate actively in virtual meetings.
r(df=24)=.42, p<.05 Q/A method has the strongest correlation with
perceived customer participation.
"If they were more proactive and put more effort into participation we could have accurately captured what they really wanted and elicited what they hadn't though of. Instead, they constantly said yes to our suggestions ..."
![Page 54: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
54
Conclusions Customer Participation is important for
Distributed Requirements Engineering Asynchronous Techniques tended to not
provide enough information causing groups relying on these methods to produce lower quality SRS documents.
Communication challenges led participants to using text chat and email for requirements elicitation which tended to be less effective.
![Page 55: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
55
Future Work An empirical study to compare face-to-face
versus distributed requirements analysis
Empirical studies with control variables to discover more about effectiveness for distributed requirements analysis
Requirements Elicitation Techniques Groupware tools Synchronous vs. Asynchronous groupware tools
Empirical studies with more experienced Requirements Engineers
![Page 56: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
56
Future Work - 2 Empirical Studies with customers having
a higher stake in project success
Build a prototype groupware system with groupware functionality identified in this study, then conduct further empirical studies Video-conferencing Integrated System
![Page 57: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
57
Acknowledgements Committee
Dr. Stephen Edwards, co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson, co-chair Dr. James D. Arthur Dr. Doug A. Bowman
CS5704 Spring 2001 Students CS5734 Spring 2001 Students Faculty Development Institute Pete Schoenhoff, Philip Isenhour, and
more
![Page 58: Tools and Techniques for Effective Distributed Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Study Wes J. Lloyd Dr. Stephen Edwards, Co-chair Dr. Mary Beth Rosson,](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070323/56649da75503460f94a93268/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
58
Questions