Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

PC-RE: a method for personal and contextual requirements engineering with some experience

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Requirements Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A method for requirements analysis is proposed that accounts for individual and personal goals, and the effect of time and context on personal requirements. First a framework to analyse the issues inherent in requirements that change over time and location is proposed. The implications of the framework on system architecture are considered as three implementation pathways: functional specifications, development of customisable features and automatic adaptation by the system. These pathways imply the need to analyse system architecture requirements. A scenario-based analysis method is described for specifying requirements goals and their potential change. The method addresses goal setting for measurement and monitoring, and conflict resolution when requirements at different layers (group, individual) and from different sources (personal, advice from an external authority) conflict. The method links requirements analysis to design by modelling alternative solution pathways. Different implementation pathways have cost–benefit implications for stakeholders, so cost–benefit analysis techniques are proposed to assess trade-offs between goals and implementation strategies. The use of the framework is illustrated with two case studies in assistive technology domains: e-mail and a personalised navigation system. The first case study illustrates personal requirements to help cognitively disabled users communicate via e-mail, while the second addresses personal and mobile requirements to help disabled users make journeys on their own, assisted by a mobile PDA guide. In both case studies the experience from requirements analysis to implementation, requirements monitoring, and requirements evolution is reported.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sommerville I, Kotonya G (1998) Requirements engineering: processes and techniques. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  2. Robertson J, Robertson S (1999) Mastering the requirements process. Addison Wesley, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  3. Newell AF, Gregor P (2000) User sensitive inclusive design: in search of a new paradigm. ACM Conference on Universal Usability. ACM Press, New York, pp 39–44

  4. Clements P, Northrop LM (2001) Software product lines: practices and patterns. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  5. Yu Y, Leite J, Mylopoulos J (2004) “From goals to aspects: discovering aspects from requirements goal models,” 12th IEEE international requirements engineering conference. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 38–47

  6. Fickas S, Feather MS (1995) “Requirements monitoring in dynamic environments,” 1995 IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering (RE ‘95). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 140–147

  7. Cheverst K, Davies N, Mitchell K, Friday A, Efstratiou C (2000) “Developing a context-aware electronic tourist guide: some issues and experiences,” Conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM Press, New York, pp 17–24

  8. Abowd GD, Mynatt ED (2000) charting past, present and future research in ubiquitous computing. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 7:29–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chung L, Nixon BA (1995) “Dealing with non-functional requirements: three experimental studies of a process-oriented approach,” 17th international conference on systems engineering. Los Alamitos CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 25–37

  10. Pohl K (1993) “The three dimensions of requirements engineering,” CAiSE ‘93, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  11. Roman GC (1985) A taxonomy of current issues in requirements engineering. Computer 18:14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zave P (1995) “Classification of research efforts in requirements engineering,” 1995 IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering (RE ‘95). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos CA, pp 214–216

  13. Potts C, Takahashi K, Anton AI (1994) Inquiry-based requirements analysis. IEEE Softw 11:21–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Potts C (1999) “ScenIC: a strategy for inquiry-driven requirements determination,” 4th IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos CA, pp 58–65

  15. Marcus A (2000) Multimedia interface design studio. Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Norman DA (2004) Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. De Angeli A, Athavankar UA, Joshi A, Coventry L, Johnson GI (2004) Introducing ATMs in India: a contextual enquiry. Interact Comput 16:29–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sutcliffe AG (2002) User-centred requirements engineering. Springer, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Fischer G (2001) User modeling in human–computer interaction. User Model User-Adapt Interact 11:65–86

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Lieberman H (2001) Your wish is my command: programming by example. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fischer G (1993) “Beyond human computer interaction: designing useful and usable computational environments,” Proceedings of the HCI 93 Conference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 17–31

  22. Folstein M, Folstein S, McHugh P (1975) Mini-mental state: a practical method for grading the state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:1889–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sutcliffe AG (2003) Multimedia and virtual reality: designing multisensory user interfaces. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sohlberg MM, Ehlhardt LA, Fickas S, Sutcliffe AG (2003) A pilot study exploring electronic mail in users with acquired cognitive-linguistic impairments. Brain Injury 17:609–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sutcliffe AG, Ryan M (1998) “Experience with SCRAM: a scenario requirements analysis method,” IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering: RE ’98. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 164–171

  26. Choi B, Lee I, Kim J, Yunsuk J (2005) “A qualitative cross national study of cultural influences on mobile data service design,” 2005 Conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2005. ACM Press, New York, pp 661–670

  27. Krumbholz M, Maiden NAM (2001) The Implementation of ERP Packages in Different Organisational and National Cultures. Inf Syst 26:185–204

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Hofstede G (1980) Cultures consequences: international differences in work related values. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hall ET (1976) Beyond culture. Anchor Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Somers H, Whyman EK (1999) Evaluation metrics for a translation memory system. Softw Pract Exp 29:1265–1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fitzpatrick G (2003) The locales framework: understanding and designing for wicked problems. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Dix A, Rhodden T, Davies N, Trevor J, Friday A, Palfreyman K (2000) Exploiting space and time as a design framework for interactive mobile systems. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 7:285–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Dey AK, Mankoff J (2005) Designing mediation for context aware applications. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 12:53–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Van Lamsweerde A, Letier E (2000) Handling obstacles in goal-oriented requirements engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26:978–1005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fickas S, Robinson W, Sohlberg MM (2005) “The role of deferred requirements in a longitudinal study of emailing,” 13th IEEE international conference on requirements engineering. Los Alamitos, pp 145–154

  36. Lam W, McDermid JA, Vickers AJ (1997) “Ten steps towards systematic requirements reuse,” ISRE ‘97: 3rd IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 6–15

  37. Carroll JM (1990) The Nurnberg funnel: designing minimalist instruction for practical computer skill. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sutcliffe AG, Fickas S, Sohlberg MM, Ehlhardt LA (2003) Investigating the usability of assistive user interfaces. Interact Comput 15:577–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fickas S (2005) “Clinical requirements engineering,” ICSE 2005: 27th International conference of software engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos

  40. Robinson W (2003) “Monitoring web service requirements,” 11th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE’03). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 65–74

  41. Conklin J, Begeman ML (1988) gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. ACM Trans Office Inf Syst 64:303–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hui B, Laiskos S, Mylopoulos J (2003) “Requirements analysis for customisable software: a goals skills preferences framework,” IEEE joint international conference on requirements engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 117–126

  43. Nuseibeh B, Easterbrook S (2000) “Requirements engineering: a roadmap,” international conference on software engineering (ICSE-2000). ACM Press, New York

  44. Basili VR, Rombach HD (1988) The TAME project: towards improvement-orientated software environments. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 14:758–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by the US Department of Education and National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research Think and Link project: http://www.think-and-link.org/

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for HCI Design, School of Informatics, University of Manchester, P.O.Box 88, M60 1QD, Manchester, UK

    Alistair Sutcliffe

  2. Department of Computer & Information Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403-1202, USA

    Stephen Fickas

  3. Communication Disorders & Sciences, College of Education, 5251 University Of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403-1202, USA

    McKay Moore Sohlberg

Authors
  1. Alistair Sutcliffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Fickas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. McKay Moore Sohlberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alistair Sutcliffe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sutcliffe, A., Fickas, S. & Sohlberg, M.M. PC-RE: a method for personal and contextual requirements engineering with some experience. Requirements Eng 11, 157–173 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-006-0030-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-006-0030-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation