Practitioners’ Perspectives towards Requirements Engineering: A Survey

Author:

Ozkaya Mert1ORCID,Akdur Deniz2ORCID,Toptani Etem Cetin3ORCID,Kocak Burak3ORCID,Kardas Geylani4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Computer Engineering Department, Yeditepe University, Istanbul 34755, Turkey

2. ASELSAN Inc., Ankara 06830, Turkey

3. DFDS, Istanbul 34746, Turkey

4. International Computer Institute, Ege University, Izmir 35100, Turkey

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the results of our survey among 84 practitioners in order to understand practitioners’ perspectives towards requirements engineering. We asked 28 questions to learn the practitioners’ motivations, the techniques and technologies used for different activities, practitioners’ experiences with customer involvement, and any challenges encountered. Some important results are as follows: the practitioners’ top motivations are the precise communication of requirements and analyzing the requirements to detect issues. Most practitioners (i) insist on using natural languages, (ii) specify requirements as the use case and scenario descriptions, (iii) neglect using/transforming requirements for making high-level decisions and reasoning about requirements, (iv) neglect the specifications of quality requirements and their reasoning while considering quality requirements important, and (v) neglect any technologies for facilitating requirements engineering (e.g., meta-modeling technologies, formal verification tools, and advanced tools). Practitioners are challenged by the cost and effort spent in specifying requirements, the omissions of errors, misinterpretations of requirements and their incorrect (manual) transformations, and customers’ lack of technical knowledge. With the survey results, practitioners can gain an awareness on the general perspectives, academics can trigger new research addressing the observed issues, and tool vendors can improve their tools with regard to the weaknesses determined.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Information Systems and Management,Computer Networks and Communications,Modeling and Simulation,Control and Systems Engineering,Software

Reference80 articles.

1. Software Crisis 2.0;Fitzgerald;Computer,2012

2. (2022, October 15). Chaos Report 2015. Available online: https://www.standishgroup.com/sample_research_files/CHAOSReport2015-Final.pdf.

3. The Ariane 5 software failure;Dowson;ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes,1997

4. Seeing More of the World;Jackson;IEEE Softw.,2004

5. The Therac-25: 30 Years Later;Leveson;Computer,2017

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3