SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 4
Baixar para ler offline
960 2006 IRMA International Conference
Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Combat the Menace of Scope Creep of
Development Projects through the
Use of EUReqa Methodology:
A Collaborative and Iterative
Requirement Engineering Process
Ravi Sankar, Assistant Vice President, Retail and Consumer Goods, Satyam Computer Services, One Gatehall Plaza Suite 300,
Parsippany, NJ, P 203 241 5400, ravi_sankar@satyam.com
Rambabu Yeleti, Senior Consultant, Satyam Computer Services
Abdul Hakeem, Senior Consultant, Satyam Computer Services
ABSTRACT
EUReqA (Evolutionary Use Case driven Requirement Engineering
Approach) is a new methodology for gathering requirements and was
used to develop the Functional Specifications for a Large Fixed Contract
Application Development Project. The requirements are built to suit the
business drivers and consensus is built amongst the diverse set of
stakeholders by iteratively moving from consensus at a high level and
adding granularity and stakeholders simultaneously. If there is some
divergence from scope or consensus the process moves the requirements
back to the stage where consensus existed and then moves forward
keeping scope in mind. The methodology was proven in a project where
the requirements were collected and documented in the form of use cases
and user interface prototypes in a period of three (3) months for a large
system which eventually was built with over a million lines of code. The
EuReqA methodology can and should be used for all large system
development projects involving significant business processes and
multiple diverse interests.
INTRODUCTION
The primary measure of success for any IT based business solution is the
degree to which it satisfies to the business objective which it intended
for. Broadly speaking requirement engineering is the process of discov-
ering those objectives by identifying right set of stakeholders and their
stated and implied needs. There are numerous inherent challenges to this
process chief among them is the diverse stakeholders with vague and
conflicting goals and objectives.
In this paper we present a new reusable methodology called EUReqA
(Evolutionary Use Case driven Requirement Engineering Approach)
that we have developed to evolve detailed Functional Specifications for
Large Fixed Contract Application Development Projects. EUReqA [1]
uses a multistage iterative approach for creating detailed functional
specifications by selectively involving the appropriate diverse stake
holders during the following six (6) stages of the Requirements Gathering
Life Cycle.
• Requirement Definition
• Requirement Elicitation
• Rapid Wire frame prototyping / Blueprint
• Requirement Validation
• Requirement Refinement
• Requirement Signoff
By using collaborative and iterative consensus at each stage, we ensure
that the user acceptability at the later stages of the project is very high.
Also as discussions force the requirements to creep and expand, the
methodology will force the team to move back to the less granular stage,
reiterate the consensus that was build and move forward. Also using the
Prototyping stage forces the system requirements to be well documented
in a visual easy to relate manner without much opportunity for
expansion.
BACKGROUND
Pamela Zave [04] provides one of the clearest definitions of Require-
ment Engineering: “Requirements engineering is the branch of software
engineering concerned with the real-world goals for, functions of, and
constraints on software systems. It is also concerned with the relation-
ship of these factors to precise specifications of software behavior, and
to their evolution over time and across software families.”
This definition is more appealing for number of reasons as it empahisis
the importance of ‘real world’ goals that essentially are the prime factor
for development of IT solutions, second it highlights the ‘precise
Prototype
Define
Elicit
Refine
Validate
Sign off
Next Stage
Figure 1.
IDEA GROUP PUBLISHING
This paper appears in the book, Emerging Trends and Challenges in Information Technology Management, Volume 1 and Volume 2
edited by Mehdi Khosrow-Pour © 2006, Idea Group Inc.
701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Suite 200, Hershey PA 17033-1240, USA
Tel: 717/533-8845; Fax 717/533-8661; URL-http://www.idea-group.com
ITB12824
Emerging Trends and Challenges in IT Management 961
Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
specifications’ These basically leads to analyzing requirements, con-
firming that they are the real needs of stakeholders, defining what
designers/programmer have to build, and ensuring that they have build
the software correctly.
As today more and more large IT projects are being outsourced and it
is imperative that the requirements definition be adequately and appro-
priately defined. Loose definitions and lack of true consensus leads to
increased scope at each stage of system development and complete
runaway scope inflation by the time the project reaches the user
acceptance stage. Functional Requirements is the area that is the avenue
for lost margins and provides the foundation for user acceptance. Prior
to development of the EUReqA methodology we found that that, while
tools exist for documentation, we did not find an appropriate system or
a standard methodology for managing the requirement gathering pro-
cess.
The EuReqA methodology significantly improves the quality of the
requirements definition thereby reducing scope creep and leading to a
faster development process. Dean Leffingwell, CEO of Requisite, Inc.,
says [3] “the cost of correcting an error at the Requirements stage is five
to ten times cheaper than the cost of correcting the error at the coding
stage. …at the acceptance testing stage, it is twenty five to fifty times
as expensive. The testing scripts and scenarios also are derived from the
requirements leading to easier acceptance and deployment. Any large
fixed bid contract for system development would benefit from this
methodology. Other projects for which strict lime line adherence is
somewhat mandatory would greatly benefit from using this methodol-
ogy. This methodology is very timely since it offers solutions to the
emerging business drivers in the management of large IT projects
namely:
1. Outsourcing/off-shoring and
2. Large projects being driven and managed by business managers
as opposed to traditional IT management.
EuReqA is collaborative and Iterative and is based on the following four
principles:
• Collaboration: In order to have richer understanding of busi-
ness objectives and user needs and get all stake holders buy in,
foster strong involvement of all stake holders during various
stages of the requirement life cycle They techniques this include
brainstorming and focus groups of SME, as well as consensus-
building workshops with an unbiased facilitation by Functional
and Technical Consultants of System Integrator
• Multistage Iterative: Flesh out the requirements in stages
adding more granularities at each stage, developing consensus at
each iterations with different stake holders.
• Scope Adherence: Avoid scope creep in the form of more
complex functionality within the pre-defined ‘features’ i.e.
control adding complexity within the same functionality
• Time-Boxing: Each stage needs to be defined in multiple short
time boxes to get quick feedback from a broad range of users and
helps to the gauge business user’s perceptions
METHODOLOGY—THE EUREQA MODEL
EuReqA uses a multistage iterative approach for creating detailed
functional specifications in the form of business use cases and a user
interface prototype.
The stages involve in sequence:
1. Getting consensus on the high level Business Process
2. Identify the critical points in the business process as key features
and thus also defining the potential use cases
3. Developing into high level Use case scenarios
4. Fully expanding on the Use cases
5. Developing the User interface prototype
Within each stage we need follow the process driven method to control
scope and increase acceptance criteria. In these stages we need to
maintain consensus amongst the diverse stake holders (business subject
matter experts, operations supervisors, IT managers, IT developers)
each of whom have different agendas to be fulfilled. We recognize that
there are varying needs and need to bring them in for acceptance at
different levels of detail. The methodology and the overall process at
the most conceptual level is similar to the Waterfall method of serially
completing specific stages and moving forward. The significant varia-
tion is that in the EuReqA methodology we begin working on the next
stage just as the prior stage is nearing completion.
The EuReqA methodology essentially is a hybrid approach combining
the best of breed features of the RUP [2] methodology with the Waterfall
method for SDLC. Other methods that are in the same vein usable for
developing requirements are Boehm’s Spiral methodology. The creation
or functional specification at each stage whether it be a business process
definition or wire frame prototype is developed rapidly at the highest
level of understanding and consensus and granularity brought into it in
an iterative fashion.
The other key and differentiating aspect of the EuReqA methodology
is that it is a consultative approach which is geared to “Driving
Technology with a Business Focus” unlike other methodologies where
technology is the dog and wags the business tail. The EuReqA method
requires that the development team manifest significant domain/busi-
ness pedigree and leverage the same throughout the engagement to gain
better acceptance. Typical IT Services companies that work on these
engagements need to focus more on building good relationships to ensure
the project is deployed successfully with user acceptance and not just
focus on negotiating and delivering the contracts/project to the literal
terms of engagement.
IMPLEMENTATION REFERENCES – CASE STUDY
EuReqA was successfully developed and tested in a project involving a
multi-Billion dollar food company, who had contracted Satyam Com-
puter Services as the System Integrator to build one integrated system
to support the transportation operations of all divisions and business
units, many of which had been acquired recently or in general used
different processes and systems to support their operations. The major
problem in requirements gathering were to build consensus amongst
conflicting players such as business users, client IT management,
adjacent system owners, Satyam functional consultants and Satyam
technical leads to create a comprehensive system everyone would
accept. The team had to avoid scope creep, open ended process redesign,
and the general tendency to build a system that supported every possible
variation of every transportation management activity.
The benefits of the methodology were manifest in the following ways:
• The Scope of the project was maintained close to the one
envisaged while estimating, and allowed System Integrator to
User
Interface
Scenario
Use Case
Feature
Business
Process
Figure 2.
962 2006 IRMA International Conference
Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
maintain their planned margin at the same time the client got
their system with all the required features
• Clear user requirements that were understood by architecture and
development teams so that they can relatively quickly create the
technical design and development documents
• The methodology and the system developed were very well
received and accepted and team picked up more champions for
our deliverables after the test and review at each iteration so that
the final deliverables went to executive sign-off with consensus
from all interested parties
The benefits received were validated empirically in the ability to keep
to the schedule wherein the project team could quickly build a large
application within 12 months which was broken up as follows:
• Functional Requirements covering about 200 use cases in about
3 months
• Technical Design of 1640 classes and related sequence diagrams
in about three months
• Code Delivery of over 1910 objects with over 500,000 lines of
code in six months
• Over 700 Test scenarios with multiple test scripts within each
scenario
• Detailed Data model with over 180 Data base Files/Tables with
over 1200 fields during the period of the functional and technical
design.
DISCUSSION—BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
Many delivered IT solutions do not satisfy intended objectives and needs
due, at least partly, to ineffective Requirements Engineering which
often are treated as a time-consuming, bureaucratic and contractual
process. This mindset is changing as Requirement Engineering is increas-
ingly recognized as a critically important activity in any systems
engineering process.
There are many specific benefits of this methodology. These include:
• Well articulated and thoroughly reviewed functional require-
ments in the form of use cases and process flow diagrams
• Scope of the project maintained close to the one envisaged while
estimating
• Use of functional personnel to drive functional and technical
requirements helps insure alignment with Business sponsors of
IT projects
• Clear user requirements that were understood by architecture and
development teams so that they can relatively quickly create the
technical design and development documents
• Close Knit well bonded team to help us in the next stages of design
development testing and deployment of the system
The key lessons learnt from this body of work are:
• Strong and clear commitment of Client business users and SMEs
are key to capture the business requirements
• Need to have specialized skilled personnel with cross over skills
of functional expertise and system design competence
• Building consensus at each stage is critical to ensure sign-offs and
avoiding scope creeps and delays
• Develop good rapport with both Client business users and IS
teams right in the beginning and nurtured through out, pay good
dividends towards successful delivery
• An iterative approach towards requirement management enables
us to start documenting the requirements without the fear of
making mistakes and also enables us to set boundaries of scope
at each stage
• Freeze scope in each stage, yet progressively building more
detailed and accurate requirements allows us to get closure at each
stage instead of rambling digressions on process redesign
• Expectations need to be clearly understood by all stakeholders
• Have clearly defined roles & responsibilities
• Develop a comprehensive evaluation plan and continue to
monitor very closely against the schedule
• Collect data early and react quickly - taking an early pulse is
critical to ensure that the process is kept on track and that the
project enjoys success as planned.
CONCLUSIONS
The key learning was that the Eureqa methodology works very well for
development of large complex systems with diverse stake holders. This
methodology seems to work some advantages in the outsourcing/off
shoring environment because the understanding is faster as granularity
develops.
We must ensure that the boundaries of the work to be done within each
of the multiple stages and iterations should be transparent; each user
group should be communicated with clearly to improve collaboration.
We also must ensure that all stake holders have an opportunity to
provide input into the decisions relating to the new “one integrated
process”, and divide the total body of work into narrower manageable
time boxed segments with specific tests at each stage and clearly defined
test scripts derived from the requirements.
We suggest the continuous reuse of this methodology as standard best
practice for collection and functional requirements documentation of
all large development projects.
REFERENCES
[1] Ravi Sankar, Rambabu Yeleti, Abdul Hakeem, “Collaborative
Functional Specifications Development for Large Fixed Bid
Applications” Presentation at Gyan Lahiri, PMI International
Conference, Hyderabad, India April 2005
[2] Peter Eeles, Kelli Houston, and Wojtek Kozaczynski, J2EE – An
Introduction to the Rational Unified Process, Addison-Wesley,
Dec 20, 2002.
[3] Dean Leffingwell, (1996), “Calculating your RoI from more
effective Requirements Management”. Rational Software Cor-
poration, pp. 2.
[4] Pamela Zave, Classification of Research Effort in Requirements
Engineering ACM Computing Surveys, Volume 29 , Issue 4
(December 1997) Pages: 315 - 321
Related Content
The Four Paradigms of Archival History
Iván Székely (2010). Journal of Information Technology Research (pp. 51-82).
www.irma-international.org/article/four-paradigms-archival-history/49145/
Improving Context Aware Recommendation Performance by Using Social Networks
Golshan Assadat Afzali Boroujeni and Seyed Alireza Hashemi Golpayegani (2015). Journal of Information
Technology Research (pp. 73-87).
www.irma-international.org/article/improving-context-aware-recommendation-performance-by-
using-social-networks/135920/
Intelligent Technologies for Tourism
Dimitris Kanellopoulos (2009). Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Second Edition (pp.
2141-2146).
www.irma-international.org/chapter/intelligent-technologies-tourism/13875/
Secure Electronic Healthcare Records Management in Wireless Environments
Petros Belsis, Christos Skourlas and Stefanos Gritzalis (2011). Journal of Information Technology
Research (pp. 1-17).
www.irma-international.org/article/secure-electronic-healthcare-records-management/68959/
Current State of Highway Projects Planning and Scheduling
Sunil Sharma, V. K. Bansal and Raman Parti (2014). International Journal of Information Technology
Project Management (pp. 50-67).
www.irma-international.org/article/current-state-of-highway-projects-planning-and-
scheduling/122123/

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Sdlc framework
Sdlc frameworkSdlc framework
Sdlc framework
BILL bill
 
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCETHE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
vivatechijri
 

Mais procurados (18)

Sdlc tutorial
Sdlc tutorialSdlc tutorial
Sdlc tutorial
 
Sdlc framework
Sdlc frameworkSdlc framework
Sdlc framework
 
Process-Centred Functionality View of Software Configuration Management: A Co...
Process-Centred Functionality View of Software Configuration Management: A Co...Process-Centred Functionality View of Software Configuration Management: A Co...
Process-Centred Functionality View of Software Configuration Management: A Co...
 
Lecture 2 - KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS LIFE CYCLE
Lecture 2 - KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS LIFE CYCLELecture 2 - KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS LIFE CYCLE
Lecture 2 - KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS LIFE CYCLE
 
An Agile Software Development Framework
An Agile Software Development FrameworkAn Agile Software Development Framework
An Agile Software Development Framework
 
Unit 2 analysis and software requirements
Unit 2 analysis and software requirementsUnit 2 analysis and software requirements
Unit 2 analysis and software requirements
 
Microsoft Abbreviations Dictionary
Microsoft Abbreviations DictionaryMicrosoft Abbreviations Dictionary
Microsoft Abbreviations Dictionary
 
Top 8 Trends in Performance Engineering
Top 8 Trends in Performance EngineeringTop 8 Trends in Performance Engineering
Top 8 Trends in Performance Engineering
 
Enterprise mobility solutions & systems
Enterprise mobility solutions & systemsEnterprise mobility solutions & systems
Enterprise mobility solutions & systems
 
Agile Dev. I
Agile Dev. IAgile Dev. I
Agile Dev. I
 
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTIONEXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
 
TOGAF 9 Enterprise Continuum
TOGAF 9 Enterprise ContinuumTOGAF 9 Enterprise Continuum
TOGAF 9 Enterprise Continuum
 
Usability Evaluation Techniques for Agile Software Model
Usability Evaluation Techniques for Agile Software Model Usability Evaluation Techniques for Agile Software Model
Usability Evaluation Techniques for Agile Software Model
 
Afrekenen met functiepunten
Afrekenen met functiepuntenAfrekenen met functiepunten
Afrekenen met functiepunten
 
195
195195
195
 
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTIONEXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND DEVOPS PRACTICE AND PRINCIPLE ADOPTION
 
Program Lifecycle Management - The New PLM
Program Lifecycle Management - The New PLMProgram Lifecycle Management - The New PLM
Program Lifecycle Management - The New PLM
 
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCETHE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
THE USABILITY METRICS FOR USER EXPERIENCE
 

Destaque

Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood AmiriniaEffective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
Mahmood Amirinia
 
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYSKENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
solomon kimitei
 
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
Mostafa Marhomey
 

Destaque (18)

Goodluck
GoodluckGoodluck
Goodluck
 
ประวัติส่วนตัว
ประวัติส่วนตัวประวัติส่วนตัว
ประวัติส่วนตัว
 
Women's Access to Healthcare - Augusta University College of Nursing Presenta...
Women's Access to Healthcare - Augusta University College of Nursing Presenta...Women's Access to Healthcare - Augusta University College of Nursing Presenta...
Women's Access to Healthcare - Augusta University College of Nursing Presenta...
 
Keyracer
KeyracerKeyracer
Keyracer
 
Presentacion de ingles
Presentacion de inglesPresentacion de ingles
Presentacion de ingles
 
Renark technologies
Renark technologiesRenark technologies
Renark technologies
 
Presentación56
Presentación56Presentación56
Presentación56
 
Электоральные настроения украинцев в августе 2016
Электоральные настроения украинцев в августе 2016Электоральные настроения украинцев в августе 2016
Электоральные настроения украинцев в августе 2016
 
Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood AmiriniaEffective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
Effective Communication Behavior by Mahmood Amirinia
 
Рябиновые бусы октябрь 2015
Рябиновые бусы октябрь 2015Рябиновые бусы октябрь 2015
Рябиновые бусы октябрь 2015
 
Millennial Tips!
Millennial Tips!Millennial Tips!
Millennial Tips!
 
A Natural way to keep your Dog Healthy with Dogsee Chew
 A Natural way to keep your Dog Healthy with Dogsee Chew A Natural way to keep your Dog Healthy with Dogsee Chew
A Natural way to keep your Dog Healthy with Dogsee Chew
 
Second-Quarter 2015
Second-Quarter 2015Second-Quarter 2015
Second-Quarter 2015
 
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYSKENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
KENYA BIG FIVE SAFARI-8 DAYS
 
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
السيره الذاتيه ( مصطفى محمود )
 
Top 5 green cities
Top 5 green citiesTop 5 green cities
Top 5 green cities
 
Messaging Strategy 101
Messaging Strategy 101Messaging Strategy 101
Messaging Strategy 101
 
Diferencias en las respuestas políticas ante la crisis económica. gonzález rá...
Diferencias en las respuestas políticas ante la crisis económica. gonzález rá...Diferencias en las respuestas políticas ante la crisis económica. gonzález rá...
Diferencias en las respuestas políticas ante la crisis económica. gonzález rá...
 

Semelhante a http___www.irma-international.org_viewtitle_32970_

19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
satyaragha786
 
Fixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
Fixed Price Distributed Agile ProjectsFixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
Fixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
Raja Bavani
 
Presentation by lavika upadhyay
Presentation by lavika upadhyayPresentation by lavika upadhyay
Presentation by lavika upadhyay
PMI_IREP_TP
 
Fromscrumtokanbantowardlean
FromscrumtokanbantowardleanFromscrumtokanbantowardlean
Fromscrumtokanbantowardlean
Luca Aliberti
 

Semelhante a http___www.irma-international.org_viewtitle_32970_ (20)

Project Requriement Management Vs Agile software development
Project Requriement Management Vs  Agile software developmentProject Requriement Management Vs  Agile software development
Project Requriement Management Vs Agile software development
 
Lightweight Processes: A Definition
Lightweight Processes: A DefinitionLightweight Processes: A Definition
Lightweight Processes: A Definition
 
H017245157
H017245157H017245157
H017245157
 
Some practical considerations and a
Some practical considerations and aSome practical considerations and a
Some practical considerations and a
 
19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
19701759 project-report-on-railway-reservation-system-by-amit-mittal
 
Fixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
Fixed Price Distributed Agile ProjectsFixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
Fixed Price Distributed Agile Projects
 
The Journey to Mainframe DevOps
The Journey to Mainframe DevOpsThe Journey to Mainframe DevOps
The Journey to Mainframe DevOps
 
Hci in-the-software-process-1
Hci in-the-software-process-1Hci in-the-software-process-1
Hci in-the-software-process-1
 
Resume (1)
Resume (1)Resume (1)
Resume (1)
 
Dev ops
Dev opsDev ops
Dev ops
 
Presentation by lavika upadhyay
Presentation by lavika upadhyayPresentation by lavika upadhyay
Presentation by lavika upadhyay
 
CS PRACRICLE.docx
CS PRACRICLE.docxCS PRACRICLE.docx
CS PRACRICLE.docx
 
Perspectives on the adherance to scrum rules in software project management
Perspectives on the adherance to scrum rules in software project managementPerspectives on the adherance to scrum rules in software project management
Perspectives on the adherance to scrum rules in software project management
 
Agile software development and challenges
Agile software development and challengesAgile software development and challenges
Agile software development and challenges
 
Agile It 20091020
Agile It 20091020Agile It 20091020
Agile It 20091020
 
Introduction to Software Engineering
Introduction to Software EngineeringIntroduction to Software Engineering
Introduction to Software Engineering
 
19701759 Project Report On Railway Reservation System By Amit Mittal
19701759 Project Report On Railway Reservation System By Amit Mittal19701759 Project Report On Railway Reservation System By Amit Mittal
19701759 Project Report On Railway Reservation System By Amit Mittal
 
Agile software development and challenges
Agile software development and challengesAgile software development and challenges
Agile software development and challenges
 
Fromscrumtokanbantowardlean
FromscrumtokanbantowardleanFromscrumtokanbantowardlean
Fromscrumtokanbantowardlean
 
50120140507007
5012014050700750120140507007
50120140507007
 

http___www.irma-international.org_viewtitle_32970_

  • 1. 960 2006 IRMA International Conference Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. Combat the Menace of Scope Creep of Development Projects through the Use of EUReqa Methodology: A Collaborative and Iterative Requirement Engineering Process Ravi Sankar, Assistant Vice President, Retail and Consumer Goods, Satyam Computer Services, One Gatehall Plaza Suite 300, Parsippany, NJ, P 203 241 5400, ravi_sankar@satyam.com Rambabu Yeleti, Senior Consultant, Satyam Computer Services Abdul Hakeem, Senior Consultant, Satyam Computer Services ABSTRACT EUReqA (Evolutionary Use Case driven Requirement Engineering Approach) is a new methodology for gathering requirements and was used to develop the Functional Specifications for a Large Fixed Contract Application Development Project. The requirements are built to suit the business drivers and consensus is built amongst the diverse set of stakeholders by iteratively moving from consensus at a high level and adding granularity and stakeholders simultaneously. If there is some divergence from scope or consensus the process moves the requirements back to the stage where consensus existed and then moves forward keeping scope in mind. The methodology was proven in a project where the requirements were collected and documented in the form of use cases and user interface prototypes in a period of three (3) months for a large system which eventually was built with over a million lines of code. The EuReqA methodology can and should be used for all large system development projects involving significant business processes and multiple diverse interests. INTRODUCTION The primary measure of success for any IT based business solution is the degree to which it satisfies to the business objective which it intended for. Broadly speaking requirement engineering is the process of discov- ering those objectives by identifying right set of stakeholders and their stated and implied needs. There are numerous inherent challenges to this process chief among them is the diverse stakeholders with vague and conflicting goals and objectives. In this paper we present a new reusable methodology called EUReqA (Evolutionary Use Case driven Requirement Engineering Approach) that we have developed to evolve detailed Functional Specifications for Large Fixed Contract Application Development Projects. EUReqA [1] uses a multistage iterative approach for creating detailed functional specifications by selectively involving the appropriate diverse stake holders during the following six (6) stages of the Requirements Gathering Life Cycle. • Requirement Definition • Requirement Elicitation • Rapid Wire frame prototyping / Blueprint • Requirement Validation • Requirement Refinement • Requirement Signoff By using collaborative and iterative consensus at each stage, we ensure that the user acceptability at the later stages of the project is very high. Also as discussions force the requirements to creep and expand, the methodology will force the team to move back to the less granular stage, reiterate the consensus that was build and move forward. Also using the Prototyping stage forces the system requirements to be well documented in a visual easy to relate manner without much opportunity for expansion. BACKGROUND Pamela Zave [04] provides one of the clearest definitions of Require- ment Engineering: “Requirements engineering is the branch of software engineering concerned with the real-world goals for, functions of, and constraints on software systems. It is also concerned with the relation- ship of these factors to precise specifications of software behavior, and to their evolution over time and across software families.” This definition is more appealing for number of reasons as it empahisis the importance of ‘real world’ goals that essentially are the prime factor for development of IT solutions, second it highlights the ‘precise Prototype Define Elicit Refine Validate Sign off Next Stage Figure 1. IDEA GROUP PUBLISHING This paper appears in the book, Emerging Trends and Challenges in Information Technology Management, Volume 1 and Volume 2 edited by Mehdi Khosrow-Pour © 2006, Idea Group Inc. 701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Suite 200, Hershey PA 17033-1240, USA Tel: 717/533-8845; Fax 717/533-8661; URL-http://www.idea-group.com ITB12824
  • 2. Emerging Trends and Challenges in IT Management 961 Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. specifications’ These basically leads to analyzing requirements, con- firming that they are the real needs of stakeholders, defining what designers/programmer have to build, and ensuring that they have build the software correctly. As today more and more large IT projects are being outsourced and it is imperative that the requirements definition be adequately and appro- priately defined. Loose definitions and lack of true consensus leads to increased scope at each stage of system development and complete runaway scope inflation by the time the project reaches the user acceptance stage. Functional Requirements is the area that is the avenue for lost margins and provides the foundation for user acceptance. Prior to development of the EUReqA methodology we found that that, while tools exist for documentation, we did not find an appropriate system or a standard methodology for managing the requirement gathering pro- cess. The EuReqA methodology significantly improves the quality of the requirements definition thereby reducing scope creep and leading to a faster development process. Dean Leffingwell, CEO of Requisite, Inc., says [3] “the cost of correcting an error at the Requirements stage is five to ten times cheaper than the cost of correcting the error at the coding stage. …at the acceptance testing stage, it is twenty five to fifty times as expensive. The testing scripts and scenarios also are derived from the requirements leading to easier acceptance and deployment. Any large fixed bid contract for system development would benefit from this methodology. Other projects for which strict lime line adherence is somewhat mandatory would greatly benefit from using this methodol- ogy. This methodology is very timely since it offers solutions to the emerging business drivers in the management of large IT projects namely: 1. Outsourcing/off-shoring and 2. Large projects being driven and managed by business managers as opposed to traditional IT management. EuReqA is collaborative and Iterative and is based on the following four principles: • Collaboration: In order to have richer understanding of busi- ness objectives and user needs and get all stake holders buy in, foster strong involvement of all stake holders during various stages of the requirement life cycle They techniques this include brainstorming and focus groups of SME, as well as consensus- building workshops with an unbiased facilitation by Functional and Technical Consultants of System Integrator • Multistage Iterative: Flesh out the requirements in stages adding more granularities at each stage, developing consensus at each iterations with different stake holders. • Scope Adherence: Avoid scope creep in the form of more complex functionality within the pre-defined ‘features’ i.e. control adding complexity within the same functionality • Time-Boxing: Each stage needs to be defined in multiple short time boxes to get quick feedback from a broad range of users and helps to the gauge business user’s perceptions METHODOLOGY—THE EUREQA MODEL EuReqA uses a multistage iterative approach for creating detailed functional specifications in the form of business use cases and a user interface prototype. The stages involve in sequence: 1. Getting consensus on the high level Business Process 2. Identify the critical points in the business process as key features and thus also defining the potential use cases 3. Developing into high level Use case scenarios 4. Fully expanding on the Use cases 5. Developing the User interface prototype Within each stage we need follow the process driven method to control scope and increase acceptance criteria. In these stages we need to maintain consensus amongst the diverse stake holders (business subject matter experts, operations supervisors, IT managers, IT developers) each of whom have different agendas to be fulfilled. We recognize that there are varying needs and need to bring them in for acceptance at different levels of detail. The methodology and the overall process at the most conceptual level is similar to the Waterfall method of serially completing specific stages and moving forward. The significant varia- tion is that in the EuReqA methodology we begin working on the next stage just as the prior stage is nearing completion. The EuReqA methodology essentially is a hybrid approach combining the best of breed features of the RUP [2] methodology with the Waterfall method for SDLC. Other methods that are in the same vein usable for developing requirements are Boehm’s Spiral methodology. The creation or functional specification at each stage whether it be a business process definition or wire frame prototype is developed rapidly at the highest level of understanding and consensus and granularity brought into it in an iterative fashion. The other key and differentiating aspect of the EuReqA methodology is that it is a consultative approach which is geared to “Driving Technology with a Business Focus” unlike other methodologies where technology is the dog and wags the business tail. The EuReqA method requires that the development team manifest significant domain/busi- ness pedigree and leverage the same throughout the engagement to gain better acceptance. Typical IT Services companies that work on these engagements need to focus more on building good relationships to ensure the project is deployed successfully with user acceptance and not just focus on negotiating and delivering the contracts/project to the literal terms of engagement. IMPLEMENTATION REFERENCES – CASE STUDY EuReqA was successfully developed and tested in a project involving a multi-Billion dollar food company, who had contracted Satyam Com- puter Services as the System Integrator to build one integrated system to support the transportation operations of all divisions and business units, many of which had been acquired recently or in general used different processes and systems to support their operations. The major problem in requirements gathering were to build consensus amongst conflicting players such as business users, client IT management, adjacent system owners, Satyam functional consultants and Satyam technical leads to create a comprehensive system everyone would accept. The team had to avoid scope creep, open ended process redesign, and the general tendency to build a system that supported every possible variation of every transportation management activity. The benefits of the methodology were manifest in the following ways: • The Scope of the project was maintained close to the one envisaged while estimating, and allowed System Integrator to User Interface Scenario Use Case Feature Business Process Figure 2.
  • 3. 962 2006 IRMA International Conference Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. maintain their planned margin at the same time the client got their system with all the required features • Clear user requirements that were understood by architecture and development teams so that they can relatively quickly create the technical design and development documents • The methodology and the system developed were very well received and accepted and team picked up more champions for our deliverables after the test and review at each iteration so that the final deliverables went to executive sign-off with consensus from all interested parties The benefits received were validated empirically in the ability to keep to the schedule wherein the project team could quickly build a large application within 12 months which was broken up as follows: • Functional Requirements covering about 200 use cases in about 3 months • Technical Design of 1640 classes and related sequence diagrams in about three months • Code Delivery of over 1910 objects with over 500,000 lines of code in six months • Over 700 Test scenarios with multiple test scripts within each scenario • Detailed Data model with over 180 Data base Files/Tables with over 1200 fields during the period of the functional and technical design. DISCUSSION—BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS Many delivered IT solutions do not satisfy intended objectives and needs due, at least partly, to ineffective Requirements Engineering which often are treated as a time-consuming, bureaucratic and contractual process. This mindset is changing as Requirement Engineering is increas- ingly recognized as a critically important activity in any systems engineering process. There are many specific benefits of this methodology. These include: • Well articulated and thoroughly reviewed functional require- ments in the form of use cases and process flow diagrams • Scope of the project maintained close to the one envisaged while estimating • Use of functional personnel to drive functional and technical requirements helps insure alignment with Business sponsors of IT projects • Clear user requirements that were understood by architecture and development teams so that they can relatively quickly create the technical design and development documents • Close Knit well bonded team to help us in the next stages of design development testing and deployment of the system The key lessons learnt from this body of work are: • Strong and clear commitment of Client business users and SMEs are key to capture the business requirements • Need to have specialized skilled personnel with cross over skills of functional expertise and system design competence • Building consensus at each stage is critical to ensure sign-offs and avoiding scope creeps and delays • Develop good rapport with both Client business users and IS teams right in the beginning and nurtured through out, pay good dividends towards successful delivery • An iterative approach towards requirement management enables us to start documenting the requirements without the fear of making mistakes and also enables us to set boundaries of scope at each stage • Freeze scope in each stage, yet progressively building more detailed and accurate requirements allows us to get closure at each stage instead of rambling digressions on process redesign • Expectations need to be clearly understood by all stakeholders • Have clearly defined roles & responsibilities • Develop a comprehensive evaluation plan and continue to monitor very closely against the schedule • Collect data early and react quickly - taking an early pulse is critical to ensure that the process is kept on track and that the project enjoys success as planned. CONCLUSIONS The key learning was that the Eureqa methodology works very well for development of large complex systems with diverse stake holders. This methodology seems to work some advantages in the outsourcing/off shoring environment because the understanding is faster as granularity develops. We must ensure that the boundaries of the work to be done within each of the multiple stages and iterations should be transparent; each user group should be communicated with clearly to improve collaboration. We also must ensure that all stake holders have an opportunity to provide input into the decisions relating to the new “one integrated process”, and divide the total body of work into narrower manageable time boxed segments with specific tests at each stage and clearly defined test scripts derived from the requirements. We suggest the continuous reuse of this methodology as standard best practice for collection and functional requirements documentation of all large development projects. REFERENCES [1] Ravi Sankar, Rambabu Yeleti, Abdul Hakeem, “Collaborative Functional Specifications Development for Large Fixed Bid Applications” Presentation at Gyan Lahiri, PMI International Conference, Hyderabad, India April 2005 [2] Peter Eeles, Kelli Houston, and Wojtek Kozaczynski, J2EE – An Introduction to the Rational Unified Process, Addison-Wesley, Dec 20, 2002. [3] Dean Leffingwell, (1996), “Calculating your RoI from more effective Requirements Management”. Rational Software Cor- poration, pp. 2. [4] Pamela Zave, Classification of Research Effort in Requirements Engineering ACM Computing Surveys, Volume 29 , Issue 4 (December 1997) Pages: 315 - 321
  • 4. Related Content The Four Paradigms of Archival History Iván Székely (2010). Journal of Information Technology Research (pp. 51-82). www.irma-international.org/article/four-paradigms-archival-history/49145/ Improving Context Aware Recommendation Performance by Using Social Networks Golshan Assadat Afzali Boroujeni and Seyed Alireza Hashemi Golpayegani (2015). Journal of Information Technology Research (pp. 73-87). www.irma-international.org/article/improving-context-aware-recommendation-performance-by- using-social-networks/135920/ Intelligent Technologies for Tourism Dimitris Kanellopoulos (2009). Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Second Edition (pp. 2141-2146). www.irma-international.org/chapter/intelligent-technologies-tourism/13875/ Secure Electronic Healthcare Records Management in Wireless Environments Petros Belsis, Christos Skourlas and Stefanos Gritzalis (2011). Journal of Information Technology Research (pp. 1-17). www.irma-international.org/article/secure-electronic-healthcare-records-management/68959/ Current State of Highway Projects Planning and Scheduling Sunil Sharma, V. K. Bansal and Raman Parti (2014). International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (pp. 50-67). www.irma-international.org/article/current-state-of-highway-projects-planning-and- scheduling/122123/