Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Agile Methodologies are gaining popularity at lightning pace and have provided software industry a way to deliver products incrementally at a rapid pace. With an attempt to welcome changing requirements and incremental delivery, requirements prioritization becomes vital for the success of the product and thereby the organization. However, prioritizing requirements can become a nightmare for product owners and there is no easy way to create a product backlog, 1 to n list of prioritized requirements. For an organization to succeed, it is crucial to work first on requirements that are not only of high value to the customer but also require minimum cost and effort in order to maximize their Return On Investment (ROI). Agile values and principles talk about software craftsmanship and ways to write good quality code and thereby minimize introduction of any new technical debt. However, no solution is described on how to handle existing technical debt for legacy projects. To maintain a sustainable pace, technical debt needs to be managed efficiently so that teams are not bogged down. This paper talks about estimating priority using planning poker, modified Fibonacci series cards, and provides a multi-phase solution to create a product backlog in order to maximize ROI. This paper also provides a method of handling and prioritizing technical debt and the impact of non-functional requirements on technical debt prioritization. The solution proposed is then substantiated using an industrial case study.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Highsmith, J., & Cockburn, A. (2001). Agile software development: The business of innovation. Computer, 34(9), 120–127. CrossRef
Marcal, A. S. C., Furtado Soares, F. S., & Belchior, A. D. (2007). Mapping CMMI project management process areas to SCRUM practices. Software Engineering Workshop, 2007. SEW 2007. 31st IEEE. IEEE.
Abrahamsson, P. et al. (2003). New directions on agile methods: a comparative analysis. Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings. 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE, pp. 244–254.
Beck, K. (1999). Embracing change with extreme programming. Computer, 32(10), 70–77. CrossRef
Beck, K. et al. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Available: http://agilemanifesto.org.
Sutherland, J., Schwaber, K. (2007). The scrum papers: nuts, bolts, and origins of an agile process. Citeseer, [Online]. Available: http://scrumfoundation.com/library.
Schwaber, K. (2004). Agile project management with scrum. Redmond: Microsoft Press. MATH
Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2011). The scrum guide. Scrum Alliance. [Online]. Available: https://www.scrum.org/resources/scrum-guide.
Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management, 17(6), 337–342. CrossRef
IEEE Computer Society. (1998). Software Engineering Standards Committee, and IEEE-SA Standards Board. IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
Kotonya, G., & Sommerville, I. (1998). Requirements engineering: processes and techniques. Wiley Publishing, Chichester.
Van Lamsweerde, A. (2001). Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A guided tour. Requirements Engineering, 2001. Proceedings. Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering. IEEE. p. 249, August 27–31, 2001.
IEEE Standards Association. (1990). Standard glossary of software engineering terminology. lEEE Std: 610–12.
Anton, A. I. (1997). Goal identification and refinement in the specification of software-based information systems.
Jarke, M., et al. (1993). Theories underlying requirements engineering: An overview of Nature at genesis. Requirements Engineering, 1993. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE.
Lim, E., Taksande, N., & Seaman, C. (2012). A balancing act: what software practitioners have to say about technical debt. IEEE Software, 29(6), 22–27. CrossRef
Babar, M. I., Ramzan, M., & Ghayyur, S. A. K. (2011). Challenges and future trends in software requirements prioritization. Computer Networks and Information Technology (ICCNIT), 2011 International Conference on. IEEE. pp. 319–324.
Cohn, M. (2004). User stories applied: For agile software development. Addison-Wesley Professional.
Shao, P., Sample selection: An algorithm for requirements prioritization, ACM-SE 46 Proceedings of the 46th Annual Southeast Regional Conference on XX (pp. 525–526).
Ryan, K., & Karlsson, J. (1997). Prioritizing software requirements in an industrial setting . Proceedings of the 19th international conference on software engineering. ACM.
Felfernig, A., & Ninaus, G. (2012). Group recommendation algorithms for requirements prioritization. Proceedings of the third international workshop on recommendation systems for software engineering. IEEE Press.
Racheva, Z., Daneva, M., & Herrmann, A. (2010). A conceptual model of client-driven agile requirements prioritization: Results of a case study. Proceedings of the 2010 acm-ieee international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement. ACM.
Grenning, J. (2002). Planning poker or how to avoid analysis paralysis while release planning. Hawthorn Woods: Renaissance Software Consulting 3 (2002).
Kruchten, P., Robert L. Nord, & Ozkaya, I. (2012). Technical Debt: From Metaphor to Theory and Practice. Ieee software 29.6 (2012).
Ries, E. (2009). Minimum viable product: a guide. Startup Lessons Learned.
- Requirements Prioritization in Agile: Use of Planning Poker for Maximizing Return on Investment
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA