关于方法需求工程的旁注:专家从经验中学到了什么

S. Sim, T. Alspaugh, B. Al-Ani
{"title":"关于方法需求工程的旁注:专家从经验中学到了什么","authors":"S. Sim, T. Alspaugh, B. Al-Ani","doi":"10.1109/RE.2008.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Requirements engineers with many years of experience have a distinct perspective on the field. To sample this knowledge, we interviewed 34 requirements researchers and practitioners, each with up to 42 years of experience. We used open-ended, structured interviews in which we asked them to reflect on their experiences and professional development as requirements engineers over their careers. Several themes emerged: requirements engineers act as bridges between different worlds, good communication is key, good process can help but isn't everything, shorter requirements documents can be better, and good requirements are driven by customer value not technical elegance. All of these pertain to amethodical requirements engineering. Amethodical concepts are not rejections of method, but rather those concepts that are marginalized and left out of prescriptive methods for carrying out a procedure. We discuss these results and their implications.","PeriodicalId":340621,"journal":{"name":"2008 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Marginal Notes on Amethodical Requirements Engineering:  What Experts Learned from Experience\",\"authors\":\"S. Sim, T. Alspaugh, B. Al-Ani\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RE.2008.52\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Requirements engineers with many years of experience have a distinct perspective on the field. To sample this knowledge, we interviewed 34 requirements researchers and practitioners, each with up to 42 years of experience. We used open-ended, structured interviews in which we asked them to reflect on their experiences and professional development as requirements engineers over their careers. Several themes emerged: requirements engineers act as bridges between different worlds, good communication is key, good process can help but isn't everything, shorter requirements documents can be better, and good requirements are driven by customer value not technical elegance. All of these pertain to amethodical requirements engineering. Amethodical concepts are not rejections of method, but rather those concepts that are marginalized and left out of prescriptive methods for carrying out a procedure. We discuss these results and their implications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":340621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2008 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2008 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2008.52\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2008 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2008.52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

具有多年经验的需求工程师对该领域有不同的看法。为了对这些知识进行抽样,我们采访了34位需求研究人员和实践者,每个人都有42年的经验。我们使用开放式的、结构化的面试,在面试中,我们要求他们反映他们作为需求工程师在职业生涯中的经验和专业发展。几个主题出现了:需求工程师充当不同世界之间的桥梁,良好的沟通是关键,良好的过程可以有所帮助,但不是一切,更短的需求文档可能更好,好的需求是由客户价值驱动的,而不是技术上的优雅。所有这些都属于方法需求工程。方法概念不是对方法的拒绝,而是那些被边缘化的概念,被排除在执行程序的规定性方法之外。我们将讨论这些结果及其含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Marginal Notes on Amethodical Requirements Engineering:  What Experts Learned from Experience
Requirements engineers with many years of experience have a distinct perspective on the field. To sample this knowledge, we interviewed 34 requirements researchers and practitioners, each with up to 42 years of experience. We used open-ended, structured interviews in which we asked them to reflect on their experiences and professional development as requirements engineers over their careers. Several themes emerged: requirements engineers act as bridges between different worlds, good communication is key, good process can help but isn't everything, shorter requirements documents can be better, and good requirements are driven by customer value not technical elegance. All of these pertain to amethodical requirements engineering. Amethodical concepts are not rejections of method, but rather those concepts that are marginalized and left out of prescriptive methods for carrying out a procedure. We discuss these results and their implications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Linking Requirements and Testing in Practice Revisiting the Core Ontology and Problem in Requirements Engineering Building Contingencies into Specifications Supporting Requirements Change Management in Goal Oriented Analysis Aligning Requirements with HIPAA in the iTrust System
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1