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

Evaluation of a risk assessment system for heritage railway earthworks

There are currently over 100 heritage railways in the UK carrying 6.8 million passengers on 15 million passenger journeys and contributing an estimated £579 million to the UK economy. Many of these lines include significant earthworks, which present a considerable risk to their safe operation. In the last decade there have been major slips at several heritage railways causing major disruption to operations and a serious threat to business continuity. This research describes the application of a risk assessment system based on that used by Network Rail but specifically adapted for heritage railway conditions. Adaptations include significant alterations to the consequence categories used in prioritization of earthwork issues and a simple low-cost method of implementation based on paper forms and Excel spreadsheets. Use of the system on two heritage railways, the Bo’ness and Kinneil Railway and the Strathspey Railway is evaluated by means of discussion with railway engineering staff and civil engineering volunteers. It is concluded that whilst the system represents a realistic and useful approach to management of earthwork assets, the system could not be used by heritage railway volunteer staff without targeted training. Such training, however, would be straightforward to provide, perhaps under the auspices of the Heritage Railway Association

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

How Do Real Options Concepts Fit in Agile Requirements Engineering?

Agile requirements engineering is driven by creating business value for the client and heavily involves the client in decision-making under uncertainty. Real option thinking seems to be suitable in supporting the client’s decision making process at inter-iteration time. This paper investigates the fit between real option thinking and agile requirements engineering. We first look into previously published experiences in the agile software engineering literature to identify (i) ‘experience clusters’ suggesting the ways in which real option concepts fit into the agile requirements process and (ii) ‘experience gaps’ and under-researched agile requirements decision-making topics which require further empirical studies. Furthermore, we conducted a cross-case study in eight agile development organizations and interviewed 11 practitioners about their decision-making process. The results suggest that options are almost always identified, reasoned about and acted upon. They are not expressed in quantitative terms, however, they are instead explicitly or implicitly taken\ud into account during the decision-making process at interiteration time

The Failed Promise of User Fees: Empirical Evidence from the United States Patent and Trademark Office

In an attempt to shed light on the impact of user-fee financing structures on the behavior of administrative agencies, we explore the relationship between the funding structure of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and its examination practices. We suggest that the PTO’s reliance on prior grantees to subsidize current applicants exposes the Agency to a risk that its obligatory costs will surpass incoming fee collections. When such risks materialize, we hypothesize, and thereafter document, that the PTO will restore financial balance by extending preferential examination treatment—i.e., higher granting propensities and/or shorter wait times—to some technologies over others

The Failed Promise of User Fees: Empirical Evidence from the United States Patent and Trademark Office

In an attempt to shed light on the impact of user-fee financing structures on the behavior of administrative agencies, we explore the relationship between the funding structure of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and its examination practices. We suggest that the PTO’s reliance on prior grantees to subsidize current applicants exposes the Agency to a risk that its obligatory costs will surpass incoming fee collections. When such risks materialize, we hypothesize, and thereafter document, that the PTO will restore financial balance by extending preferential examination treatment—i.e., higher granting propensities and/or shorter wait times—to some technologies over others