Continuous clarification and emergent requirements flows in software ecosystems

I am very happy that Springer’s Requirements Engineering Journal has accepted our paper on continuous clarification and emergent requirements flows in open-commercial software ecosystems (open access to paper). This paper was joint work with Aminah Yussuf, Kelly Blincoe, Daniela Damian, and Alessia Knauss.

For me, the highlight of this paper is the visualization of emergent requirements flows throughout the ecosystem (see Fig. 1) as well as an analysis of the impact these emergent flows have with respect to our previous works on continuous clarification and RE in software ecosystems.

ecosystem

Fig. 1: Emergent communication across product teams and ecosystem actors. Size of nodes depicts number of emergent contributions by this stakeholder, color of links depicts comment type (yellow = requirements negotiation, green = coordination, brown = information).

Title: Continuous clarification and emergent requirements flows in open-commercial software ecosystems (open access to paper)

Abstract: Software engineering practice has shifted from the development of products in closed environments toward more open and collaborative efforts. Software development has become significantly interdependent with other systems (e.g. services, apps) and typically takes place within large ecosystems of networked communities of stakeholder organizations. Such software ecosystems promise increased innovation power and support for consumer-oriented software services at scale and are characterized by a certain openness of their information flows. While such openness supports project and reputation management, it also brings requirements engineering-related challenges within the ecosystem, such as managing dynamic, emergent contributions from the ecosystem stakeholders, as well as collecting their input while protecting their IP. In this paper, we report from a study of requirements communication and management practices within IBM®’s Collaborative Lifecycle Management® product development ecosystem. Our research used multiple methods for data collection, including interviews within several ecosystem actors, on-site participatory observation, and analysis of online project repositories. We chart and describe the flow of product requirements information through the ecosystem, how the open communication paradigm in software ecosystems provides opportunities for “just-in-time” RE—and which relies on emergent contributions from the ecosystem stakeholders—, as well as some of the challenges faced when traditional requirements engineering approaches are applied within such an ecosystem. More importantly, we discuss two tradeoffs brought about by the openness in software ecosystems: (1) allowing open, transparent communication while keeping intellectual property confidential within the ecosystem and (2) having the ability to act globally on a long-term strategy while empowering product teams to act locally to answer end users’ context-specific needs in a timely manner. A sufficient level of openness facilitates contributions of emergent stakeholders. The ability to include important emergent contributors early in requirements elicitation appears to be a crucial asset in software ecosystems.

Keywords: Requirements engineering; Software ecosystem; Mixed method

Reference: Knauss, E., Yussuf, A., Blincoe, K., Damian, D. and Knauss, A.: Continuous clarification and emergent requirements flows in open-commercial software ecosystems. In: Requirements Eng (2016). doi:10.1007/s00766-016-0259-1

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Continuous clarification and emergent requirements flows in software ecosystems

    • Thank you for that question, Neil. I hoped that people would get interested and look in the paper, but you are right, the Figure should be self-contained. Will add the following information:

      Size of nodes depicts number of emergent contributions by this stakeholder, color of links depicts comment type (yellow = requirements negotiation, green = coordination, brown = information).

      Still, I think it is a good paper and worth reading 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s