Do viewpoints lead to better conceptual models? An exploratory case study

N/ACitations
Citations of this article
70Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The use of viewpoints has long been proposed as a technique to structure evolving requirements models. In theory, viewpoints should provide better stakeholder traceability, and the ability to discover important requirements by comparing viewpoints. However, this theory has never been tested empirically. This paper reports on an exploratory case study of a key hypothesis of the viewpoints theory, namely that by creating separate viewpoint models to represent different stakeholder contributions, and explicitly merging them, important hidden requirements can be discovered. The case study compared two modelling teams using the i*notation to capture requirements for new web-based counselling services for a large charitable organisation. One team used viewpoints; the other did not. The conclusions include that viewpoint merging improves the understanding of the problem domain, but is very time consuming. The process of merging was more important than the merged product. The study also indicates a need for better model management tools, as both teams encountered difficulty in managing large, evolving models. © 2005 IEEE.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Easterbrook, S., Yu, E., Aranda, J., Fan, Y., Horkoff, J., Leica, M., & Qadir, R. A. (2005). Do viewpoints lead to better conceptual models? An exploratory case study. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (pp. 199–208). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/re.2005.23

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free