Requirements Prioritization Based on Benefit and Cost Prediction: An Agenda for Future Research

In early phases of the software cycle, requirements prioritization necessarily relies on the specified requirements and on predictions of benefit and cost of individual requirements. This paper presents results of a systematic review of literature, which investigates how existing methods approach the problem of requirements prioritization based on benefit and cost. From this review, it derives a set of under-researched issues which warrant future efforts and sketches an agenda for future research in this area

Requirements Prioritization Based on Benefit and Cost Prediction: A Method Classification Framework

In early phases of the software development process, requirements prioritization necessarily relies on the specified requirements and on predictions of benefit and cost of individual requirements. This paper induces a conceptual model of requirements prioritization based on benefit and cost. For this purpose, it uses Grounded Theory. We provide a detailed account of the procedures and rationale of (i) how we obtained our results and (ii) how we used them to form the basis for a framework for classifying requirements prioritization methods

Technical Debt Prioritization: State of the Art. A Systematic Literature Review

Background. Software companies need to manage and refactor Technical Debt issues. Therefore, it is necessary to understand if and when refactoring Technical Debt should be prioritized with respect to developing features or fixing bugs. Objective. The goal of this study is to investigate the existing body of knowledge in software engineering to understand what Technical Debt prioritization approaches have been proposed in research and industry. Method. We conducted a Systematic Literature Review among 384 unique papers published until 2018, following a consolidated methodology applied in Software Engineering. We included 38 primary studies. Results. Different approaches have been proposed for Technical Debt prioritization, all having different goals and optimizing on different criteria. The proposed measures capture only a small part of the plethora of factors used to prioritize Technical Debt qualitatively in practice. We report an impact map of such factors. However, there is a lack of empirical and validated set of tools. Conclusion. We observed that technical Debt prioritization research is preliminary and there is no consensus on what are the important factors and how to measure them. Consequently, we cannot consider current research conclusive and in this paper, we outline different directions for necessary future investigations

Systematic reviews in requirements engineering: A tertiary study

© 2014 IEEE. There has been an increasing interest in conducting Systematic Literature Reviews (SLR) among Requirements Engineering (RE) researchers in recent years. However, so far there have been no tertiary studies conducted to provide a comprehensive overview of these published SLR in RE. In this paper we present a tertiary study of SLR that focus solely on RE related topics by following the guidelines of Evidence Based Software Engineering. We have conducted both automated search of major online sources and manual search of the RE and SLR related conferences and journals. Our tertiary study has identified 53 distinct systematic reviews published from 2006 to 2014 and reported in 64 publications. We have assessed the resulting SLR for their quality, and coverage of specific RE related topics thus identifying some gaps. We have observed that the quality of SLR in RE has been decreasing over the recent years. There is a strong need to replicate some of these SLR to increase the reliability of their results for future RE research

Complementing Measurements and Real Options Concepts to Support Inter-iteration Decision-Making in Agile Projects

Agile software projects are characterized by iterative and incremental development, accommodation of changes and active customer participation. The process is driven by creating business value for the client, assuming that the client (i) is aware of it, and (ii) is capable to estimate the business value, associated with the separate features of the system to be implemented. This paper is focused on the complementary use of measurement techniques and concepts of real-option-analysis to assist clients in assessing and comparing alternative sets of requirements. Our overall objective is to provide systematic support to clients for the decision-making process on what to implement in each iteration. The design of our approach is justified by using empirical data, published earlier by other authors

How do software architects consider non-functional requirements: an exploratory study

© 2012 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.Dealing with non-functional requirements (NFRs) has posed a challenge onto software engineers for many years. Over the years, many methods and techniques have been proposed to improve their elicitation, documentation, and validation. Knowing more about the state of the practice on these topics may benefit both practitioners' and researchers' daily work. A few empirical studies have been conducted in the past, but none under the perspective of software architects, in spite of the great influence that NFRs have on daily architects' practices. This paper presents some of the findings of an empirical study based on 13 interviews with software architects. It addresses questions such as: who decides the NFRs, what types of NFRs matter to architects, how are NFRs documented, and how are NFRs validated. The results are contextualized with existing previous work.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author’s final draft

Test case prioritization approaches in regression testing: A systematic literature review

Context Software quality can be assured by going through software testing process. However, software testing phase is an expensive process as it consumes a longer time. By scheduling test cases execution order through a prioritization approach, software testing efficiency can be improved especially during regression testing. Objective It is a notable step to be taken in constructing important software testing environment so that a system's commercial value can increase. The main idea of this review is to examine and classify the current test case prioritization approaches based on the articulated research questions. Method Set of search keywords with appropriate repositories were utilized to extract most important studies that fulfill all the criteria defined and classified under journal, conference paper, symposiums and workshops categories. 69 primary studies were nominated from the review strategy. Results There were 40 journal articles, 21 conference papers, three workshop articles, and five symposium articles collected from the primary studies. As for the result, it can be said that TCP approaches are still broadly open for improvements. Each approach in TCP has specified potential values, advantages, and limitation. Additionally, we found that variations in the starting point of TCP process among the approaches provide a different timeline and benefit to project manager to choose which approaches suite with the project schedule and available resources. Conclusion Test case prioritization has already been considerably discussed in the software testing domain. However, it is commonly learned that there are quite a number of existing prioritization techniques that can still be improved especially in data used and execution process for each approach