Lightweight Elicitation and Analysis of Software Product Quality Goals: A Multiple Industrial Case Study

We developed and used a method that gathers relevant stakeholders to elicit, prioritize, and elaborate the quality goals of a software product. It is designed to be lightweight and easy to learn compared to methods for a more comprehensive analysis of non-functional requirements. The method and the resulting quality goals are meant especially for improving the software product management process. We used it in four software product companies, and report lessons learned and evaluation of the method based on practitioners' comments. We found it better to set the goals first for the product in general before discussing a specific release project. In addition to identifying goals that needed improvement, the practitioners considered identifying already achieved goals relevant, but they were neg- lected unless explicitly considered. Using ISO 9126 as a checklist after brainstorming did not add many goals. Prioritization was challenging due to numerous relevant perspectives. Conceiving measures for impor- tant goals seemed to concretize them.

[1]  Stefan Wagner,et al.  Managing quality requirements using activity-based quality models , 2008, WoSQ '08.

[2]  Stephen Shaoyi Liao,et al.  Exploring Alternatives during Requirements Analysis , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[3]  Mika Mäntylä,et al.  What Types of Defects Are Really Discovered in Code Reviews? , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[4]  LasseniusCasper,et al.  What Types of Defects Are Really Discovered in Code Reviews , 2009 .

[5]  Martin Höst,et al.  A Quality Performance Model for Cost-Benefit Analysis of Non-functional Requirements Applied to the Mobile Handset Domain , 2007, REFSQ.

[6]  Andreas Borg,et al.  The Bad Conscience of Requirements Engineering : An Investigation in Real-World Treatment of Non-Functional Requirements , 2003 .

[7]  Thomas Olsson,et al.  Non-functional requirements in industry - three case studies adopting an experience-based NFR method , 2005, 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE'05).

[8]  Barbara A. Kitchenham,et al.  The use and usefulness of the ISO/IEC 9126 quality standard , 2005, 2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2005..

[9]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  GQM^+ Strategies -- Aligning Business Strategies with Software Measurement , 2007, ESEM 2007.

[10]  Seija Komi-Sirviö,et al.  The PROFES Improvement Methodology - Enabling Technologies and Methodology Design , 2000, PROFES.

[11]  Tony Gorschek,et al.  Third international workshop on software product management -- IWSPM'09 , 2010, SOEN.

[12]  Barbara Paech,et al.  MOQARE: misuse-oriented quality requirements engineering , 2008, Requirements Engineering.

[13]  Björn Regnell,et al.  Introducing Support for Release Planning of Quality Requirements — An Industrial Evaluation of the QUPER Model , 2008, 2008 Second International Workshop on Software Product Management.

[14]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Software Quality: The Elusive Target , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[15]  Mario R. Barbacci,et al.  Quality Attribute Workshops (QAWs), Third Edition , 2003 .

[16]  Juha Itkonen,et al.  Exploratory testing: a multiple case study , 2005, 2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2005..

[17]  R. Katz,et al.  Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R & D Project Groups , 1982 .

[18]  Casper Lassenius,et al.  Effects of pair programming at the development team level: an experiment , 2005, 2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2005..

[19]  Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado Leite,et al.  Nonfunctional requirements: from elicitation to conceptual models , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[20]  Mika V. Mäntylä,et al.  Defect Detection Efficiency: Test Case Based vs. Exploratory Testing , 2007, ESEM 2007.