Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 23, 2019. It is now read-only.

Risk: too much or too little requirements definition #9

Open
smattingly opened this issue Nov 30, 2017 · 3 comments
Open

Risk: too much or too little requirements definition #9

smattingly opened this issue Nov 30, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@smattingly
Copy link
Contributor

#9 Issue by smattingly,

At one extreme, a pure waterfall process expects to fully define all requirements before pursuing other activities. IEEE and other standards provide guidance and outlines for Software Requirements Specification documents.

Government agencies and government contractor organizations frequently assume this approach by default. However, Boehm has identified six assumptions (p. 8) underlying the waterfall process.

For projects that conform to these assumptions, failure to use the waterfall process increases project risk. However, most projects do not conform to these assumptions. In these cases, it increases project risk to specify a complete set of requirements before exploring other activities, especially risk resolution.

The other extreme for requirements definition would be the "Code and Test" process, as described by the old joke: "you guys start coding, and I'll go find out what they want."

A more realistic approach to requirements definition might be user stories or use cases.

@JereomyAyres
Copy link
Contributor

Reviewed 9/5/18

@JereomyAyres
Copy link
Contributor

After discussion of needing to reevaluate technical details to implement.

@JereomyAyres
Copy link
Contributor

Reviewed 10/10/18

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants