11.07.2015 Views

Complete thesis - Murdoch University

Complete thesis - Murdoch University

Complete thesis - Murdoch University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

et al, 1998; Nuseibeh and Easterbrook, 2000)• complexity of RE and RE process, including contingency issues (Kamsties et al, 1998;Morris et al, 1998; Carroll and Swatman, 1999; Houdek and Pohl, 2000; Hofmann andLehner, 2001; Zowghi et al, 2001)• (lack of) sensitivity to the environment of the system (Senn, 1978; Lubars et al, 1993;Emam and Madhavji, 1995; Sommerville and Sawyer, 1997; Kamsties et al, 1998; Morriset al, 1998; Nuseibeh and Easterbrook, 2000)• communications (Al-Rawas and Easterbrook, 1996; Zowghi et al, 2001).However, despite this body of work examining issues with software development, Conn (2002)found that, although there is an expectation that new graduates should know about basicissues in RE, it is a ‘surprise’ to them that requirements is a major cause for softwaredeficiencies. Nikula et al (2000) also conclude that general knowledge of RE in industry maybe seen to be ‘quite weak’.One explanation for the problems occurring in this early phase of software development looksat the nature of the RE discipline. It is viewed as one of conceptual complexity (Batra andDavis, 1992; Pohl, 1994; Sawyer and Kotonya, 2000). This is characterised as involving multiple,wide-application conceptual structures (schemas, perspectives, organisational principles,etc) – each of which is individually complex (Spiro et al, 1991) – interacting simultaneously.In the late 1960s those involved in the development of software agreed that one mechanismfor dealing with the range of intrinsic difficulties with software (eg complexity, visibility,and changeability (Brooks, 1986)) was to embed its production within an applied scienceenvironment: an engineering approach (Royce, 1970) was advocated as the best means tosolve such problems, whether they were scientifically/mathematically solvable optimisationones or not (Mulder, 2006).However, despite the accepted view within the majority of the software development literature(eg Ghezzi et al (1991); Jackson (1995); Sommerville and Sawyer (1997); Pfleeger(1999); Loucopoulos and Karakostas (1995); Banks (2003)) that RE is an iterative processcomprising complex, tightly coupled activities (Sawyer and Kotonya, 2000), its characteristicssuggest that problems in the discipline cannot be successfully addressed from the perspectivesadvocated by a scientific/engineering approach.Indeed, some researchers and practitioners (eg Maiden and Gizikis (2001) and Nguyen andSwatman (2000a), amongst others) argue that the accepted view is based on fundamentallywrong ideas regarding the successful development of software. RE as a smoothly evolution-3

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!