The program booklet is available as a pdf
This page contains information on:
Click here for a pdf file
of program highlights. For the schedule, see the schedule page
Vint Cerf, Sr. Vice President for Architecture and Technology, MCI
Arpanet and Internet requirements
In this talk I will try to outline what I consider to be the
salient requirements that had to be satisfied in the design of
the ARPANET and the subsequent Internet. See also the following
The Arpanet was intended for resource sharing. The design centered on a
distributed set of devices called Interface Message Processors (IMPs)
that would move data from source hosts to destination hosts by means of
a new technology called ``packet switching.'' Today's routers were
yesterday's IMPs. This was distinguished from circuit switching and
thought to be more compatible with the ``bursty'' communication needs of
computers. The resources to be shared were the distributed computing
systems, their computational power and their software. In a sense,
Arpanet was a distributed collection of time-shared computers
interconnected by a high-speed network. The hosts were NOT expected to
know anything about the paths packets would take and had to be
insensitive to the word sizes of the participating machines, insensitive
to the operating systems in use by the various hosts, able to work with
virtually any kind of computer terminal. The network needed to be
resilient in the face of line errors and failures of the IMPs and had to
recover automatically from these losses. Arpanet was a single,
homogeneous network supporting an inhomogeneous collection of hosts and
operating systems. To achieve uniform communication among the hosts, the
Network Control Protocol was devised as a standard, as were the
interactive terminal protocol (Telnet), file transfer protocol (FTP),
email transfer protocol (SMTP) and so on.
The Internet added to all these requirements the requirement that any
packet switched network could be incorporated into the system, that
there be a uniform and global address space permitting all hosts to
interwork, without knowing which networks were interconnected or how
traffic was routed. None of the networks could be modified to take into
account any awareness of the multiplicity of networks making up the
system. The system had to work over all forms of transmission media
(satellite, wireless mobile, wireline, optical, etc). Eventually the
system also had to support all forms of application ranging from email
and file transfer to terminal interaction, streaming audio and video,
interactive voice and video. The principal motivation for Internet was
to provide the technical basis for the use of computers in command and
control but the actual implementation and deployment quickly captured
the interest of the academic community and ultimately became a
commercially support global system. Today's requirements are an amalgam
of the past applications and the current focus on ``convergence'' of all
applications and media onto a common Internet platform.
Vinton G. Cerf is senior vice president of Architecture and Technology for
WCI. Cerf's team of architects and engineers design advanced networking
frameworks including Internet-based solutions for delivering a combination of
data, information, voice and video services for business and consumer use.
Widely known as one of the ``Fathers of the Internet,'' Cerf is the co-designer
of the TCP/IP protocols and the architecture of the Internet. In December 1997,
President Clinton presented the U.S. National Medal of Technology to Cerf and
his partner, Robert E. Kahn, for founding and developing the Internet.
Prior to rejoining MCI in 1994, Cerf was vice president of the Corporation for
National Research Initiatives (CNRI). As vice president of MCI Digital
Information Services from 1982-1986, he led the engineering of MCI Mail, the
first commercial email service to be connected to the Internet.
During his tenure from 1976-1982 with the U.S. Department of Defense's Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Cerf played a key role leading the development
of Internet and Internet-related data packet and security technologies.
Vint Cerf serves as chairman of the board of the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Cerf served as founding president of the
Internet Society from 1992-1995 and in 1999 served a term as chairman of the
Board. In addition, Cerf is honorary chairman of the IPv6 Forum, dedicated to
raising awareness and speeding introduction of the new Internet protocol. Cerf
has served as a member of the U.S. Presidential Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) since 1997 and serves on several national, state and industry
committees focused on cyber-security. Cerf is a principal for the Global
Internet Project (GIP), and he sits on the Board of Directors for the Endowment
for Excellence in, Folger Shakespeare Library, Gallaudet University, the
MarcoPolo Foundation, Avanex Corporation, Nuance Corporation, CoSine Corporation
and the Hynomics Corporation. Cerf is a Fellow of the IEEE, ACM, and American
Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences, the International Engineering Consortium, the Computer History Museum
and the National Academy of Engineering.
Cerf is a recipient of numerous awards and commendations in connection with his
work on the Internet. These include the Marconi Fellowship, Charles Stark Draper
award of the National Academy of Engineering, the Prince of Asturias award for
science and technology, the Alexander Graham Bell Award presented by the
Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf, the NEC Computer and
Communications Prize, the Silver Medal of the International Telecommunications
Union, the IEEE Alexander Graham Bell Medal, the IEEE Koji Kobayashi Award, the
ACM Software and Systems Award, the ACM SIGCOMM Award, the Computer and
Communications Industries Association Industry Legend Award, the Yuri Rubinsky
Web Award, the Kilby Award , the Yankee Group/Interop/Network World Lifetime
Achievement Award, the George R. Stibitz Award, the Werner Wolter Award, the
Andrew Saks Engineering Award, the IEEE Third Millennium Medal, the
Computerworld/Smithsonian Leadership Award, the J.D. Edwards Leadership Award
for Collaboration, World Institute on Disability Annual award and the Library of
Congress Bicentennial Living Legend medal.
In December, 1994, People magazine identified Cerf as one of that year's ``25
Most Intriguing People.''
In addition to his work on behalf of WCI and the Internet, Cerf has served
as a technical advisor to production for ``Gene Roddenberry's Earth: Final
Conflict,'' He also made a special guest appearance in May 1998. Cerf has
appeared on television programs NextWave with Leonard Nimoy and on World
Business Review with Alexander Haig and Casper Weinberger. Cerf also holds an
appointment as distinguished visiting scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
where he is working on the design of an interplanetary Internet.
Cerf holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematics from Stanford University
and Master of Science and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science from UCLA. He also
holds honorary Doctorate degrees from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
(ETH), Zurich; Lulea University of Technology, Sweden; University of the
Balearic Islands, Palma; Capitol College, Maryland; Gettysburg College,
Pennsylvania; George Mason University, Virginia; Rovira i Virgili University,
Tarragona, Spain; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York; and
University of Twente, Eschede, The Netherlands.
His personal interests include fine wine, gourmet cooking and science fiction.
Cerf and his wife, Sigrid, were married in 1966 and have two sons, David and
Steve Lipner, Director of Security Assurance, Microsoft
The Journey Toward Secure Systems: Achieving Assurance
The growth of the Internet since the mid-1990s has changed system security
from a niche concern of a few customers and researchers to a requirement
shared by the vast majority of customers and the stuff of front page news.
Perhaps as difficult as meeting security requirements is the problem of
measuring the actual benefits of steps intended to improve security. This
talk will focus on effective ways of meeting security requirements and of
Steve Lipner holds S.B. and S.M. degrees in civil engineering from
M.I.T. and attended the Program for Management Development at the Harvard
Business School. He began working in computer and network security as a
member of the technical staff at Mitre Corporation in 1970, and has held a
variety of technical and management positions in security since. From 1981
to 1992, Steve led the Secure Systems Group at Digital Equipment, where he
was responsible for the development of a general-purpose operating system
that was targeted for Orange Book A1 evaluation.
During the 1990s, Steve served as Executive Vice President and General
Manager for Network Security Products at Trusted Information Systems (TIS).
At TIS, he was responsible for the Gauntlet firewall business, and
contributed to research in cryptographic key recovery and to commercial
and government security consulting engagements. Steve joined Microsoft in
1999 as manager of the Microsoft Security Response Center. He assumed
responsibility for the Secure Windows Initiative team in mid-2001 and was
one of the leaders of the team that planned and directed the security push
focused on Windows Server 2003. Steve is currently director of security
assurance at Microsoft.
Steve was one of the initial members appointed to the United States
National Computer Systems Security and Privacy Advisory Board. He served
on the board from 1989 to 1993 and was reappointed in 2000. Steve holds
ten U.S. patents for inventions in the field of computer security and
network security protocols.
Heinz Stoewer, President, Space Associates, President elect of INCOSE
Modern Systems Engineering - a driving force for industrial competitivity!
What effects on our engineering practices can we expect from the rapid changes in industry? Global
industrial networks with distributed operations and worldwide competence centres require different
engineering practices when compared to the past. Their requirements call for virtual presence,
real-time communication means, and extensive database and tools compatibilities. Global markets and
competitive postures will continue to dominate the engineering environments.
What are the needs, requirements, constraints and opportunities for future systems - - and software
engineers? International environments foster teamwork, multicultural communication and flexible means
of R&D, production and distribution of goods. Future engineers need to possess an ever growing set of
capabilities beyond traditional engineering skills. Soft skills are in strong demand and determine
industrial hiring priorities and training agendas. System engineers, but also software engineers,
need to posses more and more of such soft skills to succeed in their job environments.
This lecture, using examples from aerospace technology, will highlight developments in the application
of modern systems engineering practices as drivers for industrial competitivity. Systems engineering,
once a domain of senior technical generalists, with an ability to bridge several specialist fields to
create good “technical?solutions, is developing into a node within the industrial “skills web? Modern
systems engineering has to assimilate market, business and after sales servicing aspects into successful
technical concepts. This process requires the integration of soft parameters and hard engineering facts,
a demand for which engineers generally are not trained for. Competitive concepts are however not measured
on the basis of their technical merits, however genial, but on how they fare in the market, whether they
yield a good return on investment and profitability, and whether they stand up to operational, maintenance
and after sales servicing realities. The environment for systems engineering has thus drastically changed.
Competitivity advancements are the force behind and the challenge for modern systems engineering practices.
Some examples, notably from the aerospace and automobile industries, as well as from some trends from recent
INCOSE studies aimed at identifying future “Technical Perspectives and Visions?for systems engineering,
should exemplify these points throughout this keynote presentation.
Professor Stoewer holds degrees in technical physics, economics and systems management. From 1962 he
worked at Bölkow GmbH (today Daimler-Chrysler Aerospace/Astrium) and from 1967 at McDonnell Douglas
Astronautics Company/Boeing in the fields of launchers and manned space systems. As from 1973 he worked
at the Technical Centre of the European Space Agency, ESTEC, as Programme Manager Spacelab; in 1978 he
founded ESA‘s Systems Engineering and Programmatics Department. In 1990 he became Managing Director in
the newly created German Space Agency DARA GmbH for the utilization programmes and later for all German
national and international space projects. Additional functions included Chairman of ESA‘s Programme
Board for Earth Observation and Meteorology, Executive Chairman of the International Committee on Earth
Observation (CEOS) and other national and international assignments, such as member of the German
delegation to the ESA Council and the EU‘s Space Advisory Group. In 1995, after retirement from DARA,
he became president of the newly founded Space Associates GmbH, a company consulting internationally on
space matters. Between 1987 and 2001 he was parttime professor for space systems engineering at Delft
University of Technology. 1995 he became Founding Director of the international postgraduate Space
Systems Engineering Master Programme SpaceTech. He is a member of a number of international scientific
and industrial boards, such as the Board of Trustees of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA),
chair of its Engineering Section, member of the Senate of the German Aerospace Society (DGLR), chair of
the Dutch Space Advisory Committee, and President elect of the International Council for Systems
Engineering (INCOSE). He has authored numerous scientific/technical publications and holds various
national and international awards. Professor Stoewer can be reached at email@example.com
T1: Developing the Skills and Abilities
of the Requirements Engineer
Ralph R. Young
Monday 8th September, 9:00-12:30 (half day)
The focus of this tutorial is to provide a professional development
opportunity and learning experience for the junior- or mid-level practicing
requirements engineer. The topics also will be of interest to senior-level
engineers and academic persons who are interested to gain insight into
real world requirements problems, who teach related courses, or who author
related articles and books. Several handouts will help the requirements
engineer to further strengthen knowledge, skills, and abilities. A component
of the tutorial will address personal motivation and teamwork. Each participant
will be challenged to identify areas where both personal growth and improvements
in project and organizational practices can be achieved. Active participation
is encouraged. Some of the areas to be addressed include:
- The roles of the requirements engineer.
- Skills and characteristics of an effective requirements
- Best practices for requirements engineers.
- Requirements analyst's specialty skills.
- In integrated quality approach that incorporates effective
Presenter's biography: Dr. Ralph R. Young is the Director
of Engineering Process Improvement, Systems and Process Engineering, Defense
Enterprise Solutions, Northrop Grumman Information Technology, a leading
provider of systems-based solutions. Dr. Young helped lead his former business
unit (Litton PRC) to CMM Level 5 and his current business unit to CMMI
Level 5. Dr. Young is an avid reader and reviewer of the industry literature.
He consults with internal and external projects to improve their capabilities
to utilize process improvement techniques, effective requirements practices,
and address areas that are of concern to project managers. He has been
awarded Teamwork, Leadership, Continuous Improvement, and Publishing Awards
and is often recognized for his contributions in process management and
improvement. He is the author of Effective Requirements Practices (Addison-Wesley,
2001) and The Requirements Analyst's Handbook for Engineering and Computing
(Artech House, forthcoming).
Dr. Ralph R. Young is the Director of Engineering Process
Improvement, Systems and Process Engineering, Defense Enterprise Solutions,
Northrop Grumman Information Technology, a leading provider of systems-based
solutions. Dr. Young helped lead his former business unit (Litton PRC) to
CMM Level 5 and his current business unit to CMMI Level 5. Dr. Young is
an avid reader and reviewer of the industry literature. He consults with
internal and external projects to improve their capabilities to utilize process
improvement techniques, effective requirements practices, and address areas
that are of concern to project managers. He has been awarded Teamwork, Leadership,
Continuous Improvement, and Publishing Awards and is often recognized for
his contributions in process management and improvement. He is the author
of Effective Requirements Practices (Addison-Wesley, 2001) and The Requirements
Analyst's Handbook for Engineering and Computing (Artech House, forthcoming).
T2: Non-Functional Requirements - A Look
at the Context Side of Design
Recognizing the Myths - Correcting the Biases
Understanding the Problem(s) - Mining the Opportunities
Managing the Risks
Monday 8th September, 2:00-5:30 (half day)
In the good old days of computing, back when winters were cold
and we all walked 30 miles uphill to school, the quality of computing systems
was determined by whether they worked or not. The term ?worked? ambiguously
depended on up-and-running hardware and functionally correct software.
Today our clients demand much more than running hardware and functional
correctness. We, in our role as systems, software, hardware, and whateverware
designers, are expected to produce systems with functional completeness
(as well as correctness), high reliability, robustness to deal with ever-changing
environments, ease of use for many diverse user populations and enough
gee whiz features to titillate the market place. In short we must understand
and define, more completely than ever before, the business, operating,
professional, social, and cultural environments of our yet-to-be systems.
We have many fine requirements processes for specifying form. This tutorial
deals with requirements processes for specifying context.
We will illustrate, in a highly interactive manner, a series of
elicitation, documentation, and design management heuristics that we have
found to be especially effective in teasing out and defining the many critical
environmental issues and nuances. These heuristics have been developed
to help us get a better handle on those implicit, ill-defined factors of
context that can spell design success or failure. These heuristics help
us to identify greater numbers of useful new features as well as providing
better full-life-cycle requirements management. Our aim is to develop
levels of information that will dramatically enhance our understanding
of product design risk and its sources.
As an important by-product, these heuristics make design thinking
much more visible to all concerned parties - in time for more user-centered
decisions. We are provided a much clearer picture of design responsibilities,
project scope and risk, and, most importantly, a more consistent view
of user expectations.
This workshop is intended for all professionals involved in the
development of complex information systems. This includes executives
making funding decisions, product managers, planners, systems analysts,
requirements engineers, software developers, systems maintenance, yes,
and even end users.
Prof. Donald C. Gause,is a Bartle Professor and Graduate
Program Director of Bioengineering in the Thomas J. Watson School of Engineering
and Applied Science, SUNY/Binghamton. He is also a Principal of Savile
Don Gause has worked as an engineer and computer programmer and
has managed engineering, programming and education groups with General
Motors and IBM. He has been active as a consultant and professor for the
past 35 years and served for many of these years as an adjunct member of
IBM's Systems Research Institute (SRI). He has been a visiting scholar
and has lectured at many universities and institutes around the world,
has been an associate editor of the International Journal of Cybernetics
and Systems, and has served as a national lecturer for a number of professional
societies. He is a current member of the editorial board of the Journal
of Requirements Engineering.
Mr. Gause's consulting and research interests include the development
and analysis of requirements engineering and systems design processes,
the design of user-oriented systems, and the management of innovation within
large organizations. He has advised in the elicitation and documentation
of business plans and requirements for Internet start-ups and Fortune 100
companies. He has also consulted on the development of strategic business
systems, new products and processes for many leading firms.
Mr. Gause is the author (with G.M. Weinberg) of Are Your Lights
On?: How to Figure Out What the Problem REALLY Is, Dorset House, N.Y.,
1990 and Exploring Requirements: Quality BEFORE Design, Dorset House, N.Y.,
T3:Requirements-Based Product Line Engineering
Prof. Hermann Kaindl
Monday 8th September, 9:00-5:30 (full day)
Reuse and requirements are very important for efficient and
successful systems development. How-ever there are many open issues about
performing them well, in particular the reuse of requirements. This tutorial
presents the experiences of requirements reuse using a Method for Requirements
Authoring and Management (MRAM).
For modern, highly complex, high reliability systems, the need
for properly structured, carefully controlled requirements specifications,
which are understandable, complete and consistent is essential in order
for the resultant computer-based system to be delivered on time, within
budget and to the desired high level of quality. One approach to managing
these problems is to establish a pool of reusable product line requirements
and to construct the requirements for a new system by making a selection
from the pool. A product line is a group of products within the same market
segment e.g. mobile phones. A concern of this approach is the efficient
and clean selection of a valid combination of requirements. A valid
combination is one in which the requirements selected satisfy any constraints
imposed by the product line model.
MRAM is a method for establishing and selecting from product line
requirements that addresses this concern. Using MRAM means the management
of the requirements definition process is more effective and efficient,
producing more accurate and complete requirements documents. TRAM (Tool
for Requirements Authoring and Management) is a software tool to support
MRAM that utilizes current proven office technology (MS-Word, MS-Access).
The tutorial presents the results of MRAM/TRAM as it has been applied
to Product-Line Engineering of a real-world application.
The tutorial is an in-depth treatment of building a requirements-based
product-line model. It is aimed at practitioners and academics who want
to achieve significant reuse and have an intermediate or advanced knowledge
of requirements engineering, component identification and the problems
of developing medium to large computer-based systems. The audience does
not need to know about the Spacecraft Command and Control System used for
the case study. Sufficient introduction will be provided about this product
for the audience to understand the principles of product line engineering.
Prof Michael Mannion is Dean of School of Computing and
Mathematical Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland,
UK. He has a BSc in Computer Science from Brunel University and a PhD in
Artificial Intelligence from Bristol University. He has several years'
soft-ware engineering industrial experience, is a former Chairman of the
British Computer Society Special Interest Group in Software Reuse and
has served as a member of the British National Space Centre's Software Steering
Group. He lectured for 8 years at Napier University, Edinburgh and then
in 2000 took up a Professorship at Glasgow Caledonian University. He has
published more than forty papers in refereed journals and conference proceedings.
Prof. Hermann Kaindl has just recently joined the Institute
of Computer Technology at the Vienna University of Technology in Vienna,
Austria. Prior to moving to academia, he was a senior consultant with
the division of program and systems engineering at Siemens AG Austria.
There he has gained more than 24 years of industrial experience in software
development. His current research interests include software engineering
with a focus on requirements engineering, and human-computer interaction
as it relates to scenario-based design and hypertext. He has published three
books and more than seventy papers in refereed journals, books and conference
proceedings. He is a senior member of the IEEE, a member of the ACM, and
is on the executive board of the Austrian Society for Artificial Intelligence.
T4: Stakeholders Without Tears: Finding
and involving the right people for your project
Tuesday 9th September, 9:00-12:30 (half day)
This tutorial is an active exploration of how to find the right
stakeholders and how to involve them in the activities related to gathering,
communicating and managing the requirements Why is it difficult to find
the right stakeholders and just as difficult to keep them involved in a
project? The very word stakeholder suggests the answer. In order to find
the relevant stakeholders one needs to understand the project well enough
to be able to identify what is at stake and what are the relevant requirements.
So each stake needs representatives with the knowledge necessary to provide
the business and technical knowledge for establishing requirements and
making decisions. Given the involvement of human beings who have varied
specialized knowledge, it's not unreasonable that each stakeholder tends
to think his own stake is the most important and this leads to the need for
sensible prioritization and conflict management. Add to all this the
changes in direction and personnel that any project experiences throughout
its lifetime, and it is not surprising that stakeholder management is complicated.
In this half-day tutorial, participants get first hand experience
of how to discover the appropriate stakeholders and how to respond to
their differing demands. We illustrate how to analyze each change to
the project to identify whether there are new stakes and hence new stakeholders.
This is a very interactive tutorial based on our experiences in running
stakeholder workshops and consulting on a wide range of projects.
- Practitioners who want to learn techniques for identifying
and involving stakeholders in requirements engineering. People with job
titles such as business analyst, systems analyst, requirements engineer.
- Academics who want to understand more about the sociological
issues in RE.
- Project leaders and managers who want to understand more
about the requirements process.
Ian Alexander is an independent consultant specializing
in Requirements Engineering. He provides consultancy and training on requirements,
often using DOORS as the platform. He is the author of the JBA 3-Day Requirements
Engineering Workshop, and is co-author of JBA's 3-Day Systems Engineering
Course. He is accredited as an instructor for Telelogic's 2-Day Applying
DOORS, DXL, and Requirements Methodology courses, and for the Atlantic Systems
Guild's 3-Day Mastering the Requirements Process course.
He aims to improve the requirements engineering process using
scenarios, and is currently working alongside the DaimlerChrysler Research
& Technology Centre, Ulm, on reusing requirements between models of
car. He created the Scenario Plus for Use Cases toolkit, available from
http://www.scenarioplus.org.uk . His book Writing Better Requirements
(Addison-Wesley 2002) emphasizes that requirements come from people,
and gives practical advice on how to discover and structure them. He has
written many papers on the people-facing side of requirements engineering
for both popular and refereed journals. He helps to run the BCS Requirements
Engineering Specialist Group and the IEE Professional Network for Systems
Engineers. He is a Chartered Engineer.
Suzanne Robertson is co-author of Mastering the Requirements
Process (Addison-Wesley 1999) a book that provides guidance on finding
requirements and writing them so that all the stakeholders can understand
She has more than 30 years experience in systems specification
and building. Her courses on requirements, systems analysis, design and
problem solving are well known for their innovative workshops and business
games. Current work includes research and consulting on stakeholders' rights
and responsibilities, the specification and reuse of requirements and
techniques for assessing requirements specifications. The product of this
research is Volere, http://www.volere.co.uk a complete requirements process
and template for assessing requirements quality, and for specifying business
In 1983, in partnership with Tom De Marco, Tim Lister, Steve McMenamin,
John Palmer and James Robertson, Suzanne founded the Atlantic Systems Guild.
http://www.systemsguild.com. The guild is a New York, London, and (with
the addition of Peter Hruschka) Aachen, based think-tank that researches
system engineering techniques with the aim of making good systems engineering
ideas accessible, practical and usable.
Suzanne is author of many papers on systems engineering, she also
speaks at many conferences. She is a member of IEEE and the Australian
Computer Society and on the committee of the British Computer Society's
Requirements Group. She is editor of the Requirements column in IEEE Software
T5: From the sentence to the perfect
Tuesday 9th September, 2:00-5:30 (half day)
Nearly all of us requirements engineers have to cope with some
'quality' inherent to natural language: its ambiguity, incompleteness and
inconsistency. However, in 9 out of 10 cases natural language is the only
language both developers and customers speak and understand well. So natural
language is very understandable. How can we get rid of the shortcomings without
sacrificing the advantages? And how do we gain a better understanding and
improved representation of the stakeholder needs? On which requirements representation
do we base the system's acceptance?
Results of research in linguistics and psychology were transferred
to computer sciences, yielding a technique to find or even not to write
ambiguous, incomplete and inconsistent requirements. The presented method
not another approach to formally describe requirements but to work on natural-language
requirements which are written down in a specification or which have been
uttered by the stakeholder just now. This tutorial investigates the psychological
and linguistic phenomena leading to the mentioned shortcomings. Furthermore,
it is on how to remove and avoid them.
After the tutorial
- You will know how to use linguistic methods to formulate
natural language requirements unambiguously, completely, clearly and understandably.
- You will know the quality characteristics that must be considered
when preparing natural language requirements.
- You will know how to verify requirements with acceptance
- You will have had the unusual opportunity to learn how to
increase requirements quality by using requirements templates.
Learn about the success factors of natural language requirements
- Consistent, complete requirements - mastery of complexity
- Requirements templates - effective process accelerator
- Neuro-linguistic approaches to requirements elicitation
- the structure of magic
- Testability of requirements - with acceptance in mind
The tutorial is intended for requirements engineers handling
natural language requirements, system analysts, team leaders, practitioners
and researchers. We will present a few slides, discuss a lot and work in
Chris Rupp laid the foundations of the neuro linguistic
programming (NLP) based requirements engineering approach and worked out
pattern driven approaches. She is the Managing Director of SOPHIST GROUP,
Germany and author of many publications. Chris specializes in the analysis
of safety critical technical applications of international customers. Her
methodologies comprise among others, natural language and object oriented
analysis and Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
Rolf Goetz extensively worked on the 'SOPHIST REgelwerk'
(SOPHIST Set of REgulations), a set of best practices for requirements
engineering, one of them being the methods for analyzing natural language.
He is Senior Consultant for the SOPHIST GROUP, specialized in coaching
RE methodologies for national and international customers. He mainly works
with natural language analysis, selected aspects of analytical philosophy
and various change management practices.
Chris and Rolf both are authors of the bestselling german RE-book
"Requirements Engineering und -Management, Professionelle, iterative Anforderungssanalyse
für die Praxis", Hanser, München, 2002, ISBN 3-446-21960-9.
T6: Theory W Requirements Engineering
Tuesday 9th September, 9:00-5:30 (full day)
Theory W is a management theory similar to Theories X, Y, and
Z. Its fundamental principle is that a necessary and sufficient condition
for a successful enterprise is that the enterprise makes winners of all
its success-critical stakeholders.
- Requirements engineering is one of the most critical activities
in Theory W. This tutorial will provide guidance and examples for performing
the primary steps in Theory W requirements engineering, including:
- Identifying the enterprise's success-critical stakeholders,
using such techniques as Results Chains.
- Determining the success-critical stakeholders' primary Win
Conditions, using such techniques as prototyping, brainstorming, operations
analysis, and benefits realization analysis.
- Negotiating mutually satisfactory win-win solution packages
(requirements, architectures, plans, critical components) using the techniques
above plus business case analysis, integrated product teams, and concurrent
- Value-based monitoring and control of a win-win equilibrium
throughout the development process, including balanced scorecards, risk
management, and requirements renegotiation to bring win-lose states back
into win-win states.
The tutorial will also provide demonstrations and experience
in applying a groupware toolset called EasyWinWin to rapidly facilitate
elicitation and negotiation of a mutually satisfactory or win-win set of
Prof. Barry Boehm is TRW Professor of Software Engineering,
Computer Science Department, USC Director, USC Center for Software Engineering
Dr. Barry Boehm served within the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) as director
of the DARPA Information Science and Technology Office and as director
of the DDR&E Software and Computer Technology Office. He worked at
TRW, culminating as chief scientist of the Defense Systems Group, and at
the Rand Corporation, culminating as head of the Information Sciences Department.
He entered the software field as a programmer-analyst at General Dynamics
His current research interests include software process modeling,
software requirements engineering, software architectures, software metrics
and cost models, software engineering environments, and value-based software
engineering. His contributions to the field include the Constructive Cost
Model (COCOMO), the Spiral Model of the software process, and the Theory
W (win-win) approach to software management and requirements determination.
He is a Fellow of the ACM, AIAA, IEEE, and INCOSE, and a member of the
US National Academy of Engineering.
Prof. Robert O. Briggs is an associate professor of collaboration
engineering at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands and Research
Coordinator for the Center for the Management of Information at the University
of Arizona, Robert Briggs researches the cognitive foundations of collaboration
and applies his findings to the design and deployment of new of technology
for teams. As Director of Research and Development at GroupSystems.com,
a small company established by the University of Arizona, he oversees the
future evolution of technologies being transferred from the university to
the workplace. He has published more than 50 scholarly works on the theoretical
foundations for using collaborative technology to enhance group productivity,
group creativity, and group satisfaction. His work on organizational transition
to collaborative technology led to new insights about how to conceive of
and deploy group support systems so as to create self-sustaining and growing
communities of users. He is ranked by Decision Line as one of the most
productive IS researchers worldwide. He earned a doctorate in Management
and Information Systems from the University of Arizona in 1994
RE03 Workshops Schedule
Important Dates: All workshop submissions will have the following deadlines
- Workshop Submissions: June 27, 2003
- Author Notification: July 18, 2003
- Camera-ready due: August 8, 2003
Daily Workshop Schedule (Monday and Tuesday)
- 9:00 - 10:30 workshop session
- 10:30 - 11:00 break
- 11:00 - 12:30 workshop session
- 12:30 - 2:00 lunch
- 2:00 - 3:30 workshop session
- 3:30 - 4:00 break
- 4:00 - 5:30 workshop session
Comparative Evaluation in RE (CERE)
Dr Vincenzo Gervasi,
University of Pisa, firstname.lastname@example.org
Zowghi, University of Technology, Sydney, email@example.com
Prof Steve Easterbrook,
University of Toronto, firstname.lastname@example.org
Sim, University of Toronto, email@example.com
The workshop homepage URL is:
Link to call for papers
Objectives of Workshop
The need for an assessment of the progress made in RE research
is becoming increasingly felt across the RE community. A number of
requirements and specification exemplars have appeared along the years
These exemplars have been useful for illustrating new RE tools,
techniques and methods, and for identifying potential lines of research.
However, the commonly used exemplars in RE all lack well-defined evaluation
criteria, thus making comparison of the effectiveness of the different
approaches impossible. Some of the more mature methods and tools
in RE have been subjected to pilot studies in real organizations. While
these provide a good indicator of the utility and effectiveness of
such methods and tools, they tend to focus on improvements to the technique
under study, rather than providing any basis for comparison with
There are now many signs that research in RE is becoming mature
enough that the community can begin to make detailed comparative
evaluations of alternative techniques. For example, although RE processes
are extremely rich and varied, it is possible to identify areas that
are sufficiently understood to allow the definition of benchmarks. The
utility of such benchmarks for both research and industry has been
clearly demonstrated by analogous efforts in other fields, e.g., the
TREC competition in text recognition or RoboCup (robot soccer) in robotics.
By their very nature, successful benchmarks need a community effort
to be defined and established. In seeking to define an agreed benchmark,
research communities often experience a great leap forward, both in
terms of collaboration and consensus among researchers, and in terms
of technical results. This workshop seeks to spark a community initiative
in this direction.
Requirements Engineering for Open Systems (REOS)
Robert J. Hall,
AT&T Labs Research, firstname.lastname@example.org
University of Oregon, email@example.com
The workshop homepage URL is:
Link to call for papers
Objectives of Workshop
Integration and interoperation have become the critical issues
in engineering multi-stakeholder distributed systems (MSDS) like the
Internet electronic mail system, networks of web services, modern
telephone networks, and the Internet itself. Consistent, well defined
protocols and other low level requirements enable these systems to function,
but higher level requirements placed by diverse users are
often ephemeral and typically inconsistent when viewed together.
Thus, for the field of requirements engineering to deal with open
MSDSs at all, we need to shift our thinking from systems having
consistent, global requirements to those in which requirements can
user-relative and ephemeral.
Beyond that issue, however, lurks a second major challenge dubbed
the "ignorance problem": since the nodes of an MSDS are controlled
by stakeholders with different goals, priorities, and capabilities,
just knowing what they all do is a challenge. For example, email features
and functionality have grown so complex that merely knowing a host
serves TCP port 25 (SMTP) does not give enough information to know whether
one's email message will be handled correctly. Current web services
provide the means to discover method signatures; however, formal service
standards have yet to be defined. The ignorance problem makes requirements
validation even more difficult than it is in traditional software
engineering settings, adding lack of information to the usual formalization
and computational complexity issues.
This workshop is intended to bring together researchers and
practitioners in requirements engineering, component-based design
(including Enterprise Application Integration (EAI)), verification
and validation, and related fields to discuss the challenges of designing
and using open systems in which requirements are ephemeral and
user-relative, and in which it is difficult or impossible to know the
behaviors of all the parts of the system. Our goals for the
workshop are (1) to improve awareness and understanding of how open
systems create novel problems for requirements engineering, and (2)
begin to explore potential solutions. To help focus the discussion,
we have selected some open system scenarios (see full call for participation)
and encourage each presentation to discuss how its ideas address or
relate to the problems illustrated in the scenarios. The format of
the presentations will include extra time for audience discussion of
each presentation, hopefully allowing the group both to better understand
each set of ideas and to relate them to other presentations and to the workshop
2nd International Workshop on Requirements Engineering for
High Assurance Systems (RHAS)
Naval Research Laboratories, firstname.lastname@example.org
Software Engineering Institute, email@example.com
The workshop homepage URL is:
Link to call for papers
Objectives of Workshop
High assurance systems (HASs)
are computer systems where compelling evidence is required that
the system delivers its services in a manner that satisfies certain
critical properties. Among the critical properties are security
properties (i.e., the system prevents unauthorized disclosure, modification
and access to sensitive information), safety properties (the
system prevents unintended events that could result in death, injury, illness,
or property damage), survivability properties (the system continues
to fulfill its mission in the presence of attacks, accidents, or
failures), fault-tolerant properties (the system
guarantees a certain quality of service despite faults, such as hardware,
workload, or environmental anomalies), and real-time properties
(the system delivers its outputs within specified time intervals). The goal of the workshop is to bring together
researchers and practitioners from the fields of high assurance computing
and requirements engineering to exchange ideas and experiences. This
year’s workshop will emphasize security.
Requirements Engineering for Adaptable Architectures (REAA)
Dr. Jane Cleland-Huang,
DePaul University, firstname.lastname@example.org
Mark Denne, Global Business Development Manager, Sun Microsystems,
The workshop homepage URL is:
Link to call for papers
Objectives of Workshop
The Software Architecture of
a system is defined primarily in response to customer-stated non-functional
requirements (NFRs). In more traditional software development approaches
such as the Unified Process, architecture is considered early in
the inception and elaboration phases. Candidate architectures are
identified and evaluated to assess their ability to deliver necessary
system-wide qualities, and to define a globally optimized solution. In contrast, agile processes replace upfront
architectural activities with an evolutionary approach.
This enables code to be delivered more quickly
into the hands of the customer, enabling early feedback and revenue generation,
and preventing development of overly complex architectural components
that may never be needed. To remain competitive
in today’s fast-paced and net-centric business environment, developers
must embrace change and deliver software within a much shorter window
of opportunity than previously expected. This workshop will address
topics related to implementing NFRs within the context of this competitive
and fast-paced environment. Both traditional
and agile development processes will be considered.
COTS and Product Software: Why Requirements Are So Important
Dr Xavier Franch,
Universitat Polit?nica de Catalunya (UPC), email@example.com
Neil Maiden, City University, N.A.M.Maiden@city.ac.uk
The workshop homepage URL is:
Link to call for papers:
Objectives of Workshop
Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) and product software can now
be found in most business, government and defence organizations. Selecting,
procuring and integrating COTS software are core activities of most
systems development processes. Indeed COTS products are the predominant
source of software for a wide range of today's applications - applications
for which organisations and stakeholders still have requirements.
However few existing requirements engineering methods, techniques
and tools address COTS-based software development processes. Potential
customers need requirements to select between candidate COTS products,
write procurement contracts, guide COTS product integration and explore
different product architecture configurations.
Therefore the objectives of this workshop are two-fold:
- To determine the future needs for new requirements methods,
techniques and tools that address COTS-based software development,
from the perspectives of both the customers who will use COTS
products and suppliers who produce them;
- To bring together researchers and practitioners from the
requirements engineering and COTS product software as a starting
point for more integrated research and development.
The workshop will be a combination of inviting keynote speakers
from the COTS and product software communities, short paper presentations
based on author submissions, and focused parallel working groups on
topics of important to the practitioner and research communities.
P1: Requirements evolution
In Situ Requirements Analysis: A Deeper Examination of the
Relationship between Requirements Formation and Project Selection
Mark Bergman, University of California, Irvine
Gloria Mark, University of California, Irvine
Requirements Stability Assessment Using Scenarios
David Bush, UK National Air Traffic Services
Anthony Finkelstein, University College London
Resolving Requirements Discovery in Testing and
Robyn Lutz, Iowa State University / Jet
Carmen Mikulski, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
P2: Requirements for business systems
Lessons Learnt from Five Years of Experience in ERP Requirements
Engineering, Maya Daneva
Maya Daneva, TELUS Mobility
Requirements Engineering for a Pervasive Health
Jens Bæk Jørgensen, Centre for
Pervasive Computing, Department of computer Science, University of Aarhus,
Claus Bossen, Centre for Pervasive Computing,
Department of computer Science, University of Aarhus, DK
Run-time Monitoring of Web Service Requirements,
William Robinson, Georgia State University
DWARF: An Approach for Requirements Definition and
Management of Data Warehouse Systems
Fábio Rilston Paim, Federal University
of Pernambuco, BR
Jaelson Castro, Federal University of Pernambuco,
P3: Combining formal and informal techniques
Acquiring and Incorporating State-Dependent Timing Requirements
Chi-Sheng Shih, Dept. of computer Science, University
Jane Liu, Microsoft Corporation
Refinement-Based Requirements Elicitation Using
Triggered Message Sequence Charts
Bikram Sengupta, SUNY at Stony Brook
Rance Cleaveland, SUNY at Stony Brook
Specifying and Analyzing Early Requirements: Some
Ariel Fuxman, Department of Computer Science,
University of Toronto, CA
Lin Liu, Department of Computer Science, University
of Toronto, CA
Marco Pistore, Department of Information Technology,
University of Trento, IT
Marco Roveri, ITC-IRST, Trento, IT
John Mylopoulos, Department of Computer Science,
University of Toronto, CA
P4: Goal-driven requirements
Requirements Analysis for Customizable Software: A Goals-Skills-Preferences
Bowen Hui, Sotirios Liaskos, John Mylopoulos
Adding Hypermedia Requirements to Goal-Driven Analysis
Davide Bolchini, Paolo Paolini, Giovanni Randazzo
Improving Requirements Tracing via Information Retrieval
Jane Hayes, University of Kentucky
Alexander Dekhtyar, University of Kentucky
James Osborne, University of Kentucky
P5: Requirements elicitation (1)
Security and Privacy Requirements Analysis within a Social
Lin Liu, Department of Computer Science, University
of Toronto, CA
Eric Yu, Faculty of Information Studies, University
of Toronto, CA
John Mylopoulos, Department of Computer Science,
University of Toronto,CA
Formal Structure for Specifying the Content and
Quality of the Electronic Health Record
H. Dominic Covvey, University of Waterloo, CA
David Zitner, Dalhousie University, CA
Daniel M. Berry, University of Waterloo, CA
Donald D. Cowan, University of Waterloo, CA
Michael Shepherd, Dalhousie University, CA
Elicitation Technique Selection: How Do Experts
Ann Hickey, University of Colorado at Colorado
Alan Davis, University of Colorado at Colorado
P6: Making formal techniques usable
A Reference Model for Requirements Engineering
Jon Hall, The Open University, UK
Lucia Rapanotti, The Open University, UK
Understanding and Comparing Model-Based Specification
Jianwei Niu, School of computer Science, University
of Waterloo, CA
Joanne Atlee, School of computer Science, University
of Waterloo, CA
Nancy Day, School of computer Science, University
of Waterloo, CA
Deriving Tabular Event-Based Specifications from
Goal-Oriented Requirements Models
Renaud De Landtsheer, University of Louvain,
Emmanuel Letier, University of Louvain, BE
Axel van Lamsweerde, University of Louvain,
P7: Requirements elicitation (2)
Determining Socio-Technical Systems Requirements: Experiences
with Generating and Walking through Scenarios
Alistair Mavin, Praxis Critical Systems Ltd,
Neil Maiden, City University London, UK
Requirements Elicitation for the Design of Venue
Operations for the Athens2004 Olympic Games
Pericles Loucopoulos, UMIST, UK
Kostas Zografos, Athens University of Economics
Nikos Prekas, Athens 2004 Olympic Organising
Teaching Requirements Engineering through Role Playing:
Didar Zowghi, University of Technology, Sydney,
Suresh Paryani, University of Technology, Sydney,
P8: Requirements prioritizing and negotiation
A Benchmarking Method for Information Systems
Lars Hagge, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchotron,
Jens Kreutzkamp, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchotron,
An Analytical Model for Requirements Selection Quality
Evaluation in Product Software Development
Bjorn Regnell, Dept. of Communication Systems,
Lund University, SE
Lena Karlsson, Dept. of Communication Systems,
Lund University, SE
Martin Host, Dept. of Communication Systems,
Lund University, SE
Evolutionary Requirements Analysis,
Alistair Sutcliffe, UMIST, UK
Industry session 1: Requirements Analysis
Customer Requirements and User Requirements: Why the Discrepancies?
Mary Deraitus, Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Ann Miller, Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Evaluating the quality of a UML business model
Brian Berenbach, Siemens Corporate Research, Inc.
Using Convergent Design Processes to Surface Hidden Ambiguity and
Conflict in Requirements
Raymond J. Barnes, St. Elizabeth's Medical Center
Industry session 2: Requirements Gathering
Embracing Requirements Variety for e-Governments based on Multiple
Mikio Aoyama, Nanzan University
Kenichiro Watanabe, Fujitsu Communication Systems Limited
Yu Nichio, Fujitsu Communication Systems Limited
Yasuyuki Moriwaki, Fujitsu Communication Systems Limited
From Requirements to Release Criteria: Specifying, Documenting, and
Monitoring Product Quality
Erik Simmons, Intel Corporation
The Automated Extraction of Requirements from UML Models
Brian Berenbach, Siemens Corporate Research, Inc.
Industry session 3: Metrics & Measurement
A Measure In Time Saves Nine: Measuring Requirements Traceability
Multiple Angles at Multiple Lifecycle Entry Points
Doron Becker, EDS U.S. Government Solutions
One Approach to the Metric Baselining Imperative for Requirements
Roy Chardon, Cisco Systems
Merlin Dorfman, Cisco Systems
RE in Flatness Measurment and Control Systems Developmant at ABB
Nur Yilmazturk, ABB Automation Technology Products AB
Industry session 4: State of Practice
Daily Challenges in Requirements Engineering
Frank J. Salvatore, High Performance Technologies Inc.
Requirements Engineering in 40 practical System Integrating projects
Taichi Nakamura, NTT DATA Corp.
Shigeyuki Matsuda, NTT DATA Corp.
Requirements Based Testing at HP OpenView
Gerald Heller, Hewlett Packard
Peter Vollmer, Hewlett Packard
Industry session 5: Testing & Traceability
Testing with Partial Traced Requirements: A Necessary Step Towards
Higher Quality System Level Verification
Serban Catrava, Guidant Corporation
Requirements, Configuration Management and Traceability for Safety
George Romanski, President, Verocel, Inc.
Requirement Tracking: A Streamlined Approach
James E. Archer, Titan Systems Corporation / Bureau of Land
Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado Leite
Prof. Karin Koogan Breitman
As the volume of information grows exponentially in the Web,
researchers from industry and academia are now exploring the possibility
of creating a "Semantic Web," in which meaning is made explicit, allowing
machines to process and integrate Web resources intelligently. Central
to this idea is the use of ontologies, that provide a lingua franca, which
allows machines to interact in a meaningful way. It is a general belief
in the web community that, in the near future, every business on the web
will need to provide the semantics for their pages by means of ontologies.
We understand that the responsibility of implementing the later, belongs
to requirements engineers. As such, we see a web application ontology as
a sub-product of the requirements engineering activity. Either writing
a new ontology or reusing parts of other ontologies from existing repositories,
this task has to be simplified enough so that people who are not ontology
experts can perform it.
Currently the development of ontologies is more of a craft then
a systematic discipline. In this tutorial we present a technique for the
construction of ontologies, centered on the concept of application languages.
This technique, used for the elicitation, modeling and implementation
of ontologies is based on a special type of lexicon; the language extended
lexicon (LEL). LEL is a representation that has long been incorporated to
our requirements practice to help in the elicitation and modeling of the
application language. We use the lexicon construction process to bootstrap
the construction of ontology. Using the LEL we facilitate the task of
identifying new concepts from those that can be reused from existing ontologies.
In addition the lexicon classifies its entries in a way that helps the modeling
of ontology elements.
The tutorial will be divided in two parts. During the first part
we present an introduction to ontologies in the context of the semantic
web. We discuss the conceptual modeling background, taxonomies, partonomies
and ontologies. We present a comparative survey of available ontology implementation
languages (e.g. RDF, SHOE, Oil, DAML). We follow by introducing the extended
lexicon of the language as technique for ontology elicitation and modeling.
On the second part of the tutorial we illustrate our strategy with an
example. We will make use of the OilEd tool to support their presentation
and implement the proposed exercises. In addition they will also use
the FaCT tool to verify consistency of the newly created ontologies. Both
tools are freeware. We recommend participants that have access to notebooks
and laptop computers, to download and install the tools in their equipment,
so that they can get acquainted with the available support tools.
Dr. Julio Cesar Leite is an associate professor at the
Departamento de Informática da Pontifícia Universidade Católica
do Rio de Janeiro. Dr. Leite received his PhD in computer science from University
of California at Irvine in 1988. He is a member of the editorial board
of the "Requirements Engineering Journal", member of the sub committee in
software reuse of the IEEE Computer Society and a member of the IFIP WG
2.9 (Software Requirements Engineering). Dr. Leite concentrates his research
efforts in requirements engineering, software reuse and reverse engineering.
Dr. Leite was the chair of the Program Committee for the VII SBES, that
took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1993 and chair of the 1998 and 2000 editions
of the Workshop in Requirements Engineering (WER) that also took place in
Rio de Janeiro. He was general chair for the Seventh International Conference
on Software Reuse, 2002. He has been a member of the Program Committee of
all the editions of the International Symposium on Requirements Engineering
(RE), including this one, starting from 1993. He belongs to ACM, IEEE and
is a founding member of the Brazilian Computing Society (SBC). Dr. Leite
is currently in a sabbatical at the Department of Computer Science of the
University of Toronto.
Dr. Karin Breitman received her DSc. from the Departamento
de Informática da Pontifícia Universidade Católica
do Rio de Janeiro, where she is currently teaching and continues to work
in her research. Her interests are software requirements engineering, scenario
based software process and software evolution. She was part of the Program
Committee of the last two editions of the International Conference on Requirements
Engineering (ICRE). Dr. Breitman belongs to ACM, IEEE and the Brazilian
Computing Society (SBC). Dr. Breitman is currently serving as the South American
publicity chair for the RE'03.
Scenario-based Requirements Engineering
Scenarios are concrete examples of behaviors, events, and descriptions
of the real world. They are easy to understand and relate to our everyday
lives, hence scenarios enable communication between users and software developers.
Scenarios have many uses in RE, ranging from examples that can be generalized
into requirements to examples as test data for validating requirements. The
power of scenarios lies in how they complement models in requirements specification,
but defining that relationship is not always easy. One tension is how many
scenarios do you need to ensure that all the requirements have been captured
or validated ? This dilemma underlies much of scenario based RE: Scenarios
are powerful because of the detail they contain, but the devil lies in the
detail, since you never know when you have captured it all. This mini tutorial
will explore the diversity of scenarios in RE and survey how they have been
used in different parts of the RE process. The first part will review different
definitions and approaches to scenarios, and then introduce the process of
scenario-based RE. This will lead into a summary of the relevant background
psychology for understanding the process of reasoning and communicating with
scenarios The second part will review different scenario based approaches
covering generalization from scenarios, requirements validation and discovering
obstacles with scenarios, use cases and alternative course variations, and
finally scenarios as inspectable simulations of designed systems. The final
part of the mini tutorial will review the SCRAM method for requirements elicitation
and validation which integrates scenarios, concept demonstrators and design
Alistair Sutcliffe is Professor of Systems Engineering
at the Department of Computation, UMIST (University of Manchester Institute
of Science and Technology) and Director of the Centre for Human Computer
Interface Design. He is principle investigator on EPSRC projects SIMP,
CORK and ISRE and several previous European Union and UK projects on requirements
engineering, multimedia user interfaces, safety critical systems and cognitive
modeling. His research interests cover requirements engineering methods,
requirements reuse, scenario based approaches to requirements validation,
and RE for safety critical systems. He has recent published User Centered
Requirements Engineering (Springer Verlag) and the Domain Theory on patterns
of software and knowledge reuse (Lawrence Erlbaum) He also researches in
Human Computer Interaction and Software Engineering, takes leading role
in organizing INTERACT, RE and SIGCHI conferences, is on the editorial
board of IJHCS, REJ and JASE. Alistair Sutcliffe is founder of IFIP Working
Group 13.2 'Methodology for User Centred Design', member of WG 2.9 on Requirements
Engineering and editor of the ISO standard 14915, on Multimedia user interface
QFD for Customer-Focused Requirements Engineering
Dr. Georg Herzwurm
Prof. Dr. Wolfram W. Pietsch
Software development is becoming more and more complex, dynamic
and market driven. Current Requirements Engineering methods focus on specification
and representation issues; elicitation of implicit assumptions and achievement
of consensus is often neglected, but of increasing importance in practice
since market success or customer satisfaction are as important as technology.
Internet applications are a good example: requirements and/or technical
solutions are non-tangible and fuzzy to a large degree, and the development
process must be flexible, and rapid, integrating different knowledge sources;
customers/users, developers, and marketers.
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is as flexible toolset, that
has proven to focus requirements of products and services in a market-driven
environment and has been augmented for software development processes successfully
for a longer time in practice. QFD provides a systematic but flexible
way of communication between customers and developers. Additionally, QFD
is aimed at products that present not all technically possible characteristics
but those that customers demand ("fitness for use"). If QFD is employed for
software development the process is carried out by a cross-functional team,
including customer representatives, and an experienced moderator. Especially
in the automotive industry, leading international companies have gained
a competitive edge not least by systematically employing QFD with a successful
record of several decades already. It has become an integral part of the
state of the art. QFD in software development offers still a leap for competitive
advantage, i.e. since it has been employed successfully in some projects
at DEC, Hewlett Packard, Hughes Aircraft, IBM, Vodafone, Motorola, NTT
Data Corporation, Roche Diagnostics, SAP, Siemens, Texas Instruments, Toshiba,
The tutorial provides an in-dept overview of the state of the
art of QFD in software development. At first, the differences between classic
QFD in manufacturing industries and Software QFD will be motivated. Then,
a software specific QFD toolset will be explained, that reflects best practice
and links to the state of the art of requirements engineering methodology
including instructive case studies of Software QFD. Finally, participants
may explore key elements of the QFD-toolset within a practical exercise.
Prof. Dr. Georg Herzwurm is Chair of the Information Systems
Department at Stuttgart University. He holds a Masters degree and a Ph.
D. in Business Administration from the University of Cologne. G. Herzwurm
is founder and president of the QFD Institut Deutschland e. V., a non-profit
organization aiming to improve knowledge, application, methodology and
use of QFD in all areas of academics and industry. G. Herzwurm is author
of two QFD books and numerous QFD articles as well as team leader of several
QFD projects in different industries. G. Herzwurm is recipient of the 2000
Akao Prize. He was awarded for out-standing contribution to the advancement
Professor Dr. Wolfram W. Pietsch is holding a full professorship
in Business Management and Information Systems at the Aachen University
of Applied Sciences. He is co-founder and member of the board of the QFD-Institut
Deutschland and has been pioneering the introduction, Adaptation and Enrichment
of QFD in business and research since the early nineties. Wolfram Pietsch
has been consulting several companies in Germany, Austria and Switzerland
concerning quality and process management for merely a decade. He has earned
a doctoral degree with works on project management and His current research
objective include the employment of QFD for IT Project and Programme Management
and IT Service Level Management.
Marketing meets requirements engineering
Matti Rossi, Helsinki School of Economics, firstname.lastname@example.org
Georg Herzwurm, TU Dresden, Germany
Neil Maiden, City University, Great Britain
Sanjit Sengupta, San Francisco State University
Tuure Tuunanen, Helsinki School of Economics, Finland
The emergence of embedded devices such as Java enabled phones and
digital TVs are changing software development landscape. Ever larger
portion of software is therefore developed for mass-markets.
Furthermore, the needs of the consumers are ever changing and the ways
of using disruptive technologies (e.g. SMS messaging, WLAN) cannot be
fully anticipated in advance. This is in sharp contract with the
received view of most software and systems development methods, which
assume that systems are built from scratch for one dedicated and known
organizational customer. This leads into problems with requirements
engineering techniques and methods, which make stringent assumptions
about the availability of end-users as subject of RE. We face a dilemma,
where we need to deploy finished, embedded software for millions of
users without knowing what the customer really wants.
Within marketing research and practice consumer involvement to R&D
process has been key issue for success. Especially new product
development has always had to anticipate the tastes and needs of the
general public. This panel aims to open up a discussion between these
disciplines with the purpose of searching ways to integrate marketing
research and consumer focus to RE.
Prof. Dr. Georg Herzwurm is Chair of the Information Systems
Department at Stuttgart University. He holds a Masters degree and a Ph.
D. in Business Administration from the University of Cologne. The main
research fields are development and application of standard software,
software quality management, and customer-oriented software strategies.
G. Herzwurm is founder and president of the QFD Institut Deutschland e.
V., a non-profit organization aiming to improve knowledge, application,
methodology and use of QFD in all areas of academics and industry. G.
Herzwurm is recipient of the 2000 Akao Prize. He was awarded for
out-standing contribution to the advancement of QFD.
Neil Maiden is Professor of Systems Engineering and Head of
the Centre for Human-Computer Interface Design, an independent research
department in City University's School of Informatics. He received a PhD
in Computer Science from City University in 1992. He is and has been a
principal and co-investigator of several EPSRC- and EU-funded research
projects including SIMP, CREWS and BANKSEC. He is also founder and
manager of City University's SAP R/3 Laboratory. His research interests
include frameworks for requirements acquisition and negotiation,
scenario-based systems development, component-based software
engineering, ERP packages, requirements reuse and more effective
transfer of academic research results into software engineering
practice. Neil has over 80 journal and conference publications. He is
also co-founder and treasurer of the British Computer Society
Requirements Engineering Specialist Group. Centre details are available
from www-hcid.soi.city.ac.uk. His details are available at
Sanjit Sengupta is currently Associate Professor of Marketing
at San Francisco State University. Prior to that he was Assistant
Professor in the College of Business and Management at the University of
Maryland at College Park. He received his Ph.D. in Business
Administration from the University of California at Berkeley in 1990.
His research has been published in the Journal of Marketing, Journal of
Product Innovation Management, Marketing Letters, Marketing Management,
the Academy of Management Journal, and other leading journals. His
research interests include strategic alliances, new product development
and business marketing strategy. He is a member of the American
Matti Rossi is an acting professor of information systems and
director of the electronic business program for professionals (Muuntokoulutus)
at Helsinki School of Economics. He has worked as research fellow at
Erasmus University Rotterdam and as a visiting assistant professor at
Georgia State University, Atlanta. He received his Ph.D. degree in
Business Administration from the University of Jyväskylä in 1998. He has
been the principal investigator in several major research projects
funded by the technological development center of Finland and Academy of
His research papers have appeared in journals such as Information and
Organization, Information and Management and Information Systems, and
over twenty of them have appeared in conferences such as ICIS, HICSS and
Tuure Tuunanen, M.Sc. (econ) (Helsinki, 2001), is pursuing a
PhD degree in information systems science at the Helsinki School of
Economics. His doctoral dissertation focuses on evaluating and comparing
various qualitative research methods to support idea generation and
software development in multi-access environment such as 3G mobile
terminals and Digital TVs. The research will include an effort to
develop a new method for requirement elicitation by using rich
information and discuss ways of involving consumers in information
systems development. He has published in Journal of Management
Information Systems and presented papers in various IS conferences.
Requirements Engineering in Practice: Making the Business Case for
Panel Co-Chairs: Dr. Nancy R. Mead, Software Engineering Institute
Nader Kameli, Guidant Corporation
Roy Chardon, Cisco Systems
Donald Firesmith, Software Engineering Institute
Donald C. Gause, Binghamton University
Many organizations do not practice requirements engineering, or if
they do, they try to get by with the "minimum", which is usually
defined in effort or funding. Part of the reason for this is that
requirements engineers are not always able to articulate a business
case to executive management. In a profit-making organization, the
argument for technological improvement always comes down to a business
case. If it cannot improve profits, it will not be adopted on a large
scale. You might get approval for a pilot or research activity on the
basis of a technical argument, but technological improvement on a
large scale always requires a business case. As requirements
engineers, this does not come naturally to us. We tend to feel more
comfortable with a technical discussion than a financial discussion.
Many questions and issues arise when trying to craft a business case.
Among them are the following:
Roy Chardon is a Quality Systems Engineer at Cisco Systems in San
Jose, California. He has more than 30 years experience in systems
engineering and project management. His experiences span research,
engineering, verification and validation, fielding, application,
operational support, product enhancements, and product end-of-life for
software and hardware. Roy is responsible for institutionalizing
requirements management processes within Cisco. Roy has a BS in
Physics from the University of Washington. He has done graduate work
in engineering, with emphasis on software engineering. Roy is a member
of INCOSE, American Society for Quality, and IEEE Computer Society.
- Is it possible to make a business case for requirements
engineering, or do we need to fall back to making assertions about
quality and goodness?
- What should the business case consist of? What data is needed
to support it?
- If you have only a few minutes with a busy executive, what
should you present?
- Can you make the business case without dropping into technical
jargon that will be an immediate turn-off to those who are not in the
- Do we have successful examples that can be included in the
Donald Firesmith is a Senior Member of the Technical Staff in the
Acquisition Support Program at the Software Engineering Institute.
Since the late 1970's, he has worked in industry as a process engineer
and methodologist, requirements engineer, architect, designer,
programmer, configuration manager, trainer, and consultant. Having
worked extensively with object technology since 1984, he has written 5
books, numerous articles, and conference papers on process engineering
and object technology. Most recently, he has developed a 1000+ page
informational website on the OPEN Process Framework (OPF) which is
available at www.donald-firesmith.com. In requirements engineering,
he has led numerous requirements teams, writes a regular column on the
subject for the Journal of Object Technology (JOT), and is currently
writing a book on RE based on the OPF.
Prof. Donald C. Gause is the Bartle Professor in Systems Science and
Graduate Program Director of the Department of Bioengineering in the
Thomas J. Watson School of Engineering, Binghamton University. He has
worked as an engineer and computer programmer and has managed
engineering, programming and education groups with General Motors and
IBM. He has been active as a consultant and professor for the past 30+
years and served for many of these years as an adjunct member of IBM's
Systems Research Institute (SRI). He has been a visiting scholar and
has lectured at many universities and institutes around the world, has
been an associate editor of the International Journal of Cybernetics
and Systems, and has served as a national lecturer for a number of
Nader Kameli is manager of Software Engineering at Cardiac Rhythm
Management Unit of Guidant. He has a BS in EE from University of New
Haven and MS in CS from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and is
currently working on his Executive MBA at University of
St. Thomas. Nader is active in IEEE and is currently the Industrial
Chair of the upcoming International Conference on Requirements
Engineering. He has over 20 years of experience in software
engineering and has contributed to development of many safety-critical
products in various industries, including medical and transportation.
Nancy Mead is the team leader for the Survivable Systems Engineering
(SSE) team as well as a Senior Member of the Technical Staff in the
Networked Systems Survivability Program of the Software Engineering
Institute, and a faculty member in the Master of Software Engineering,
Carnegie Mellon University. She is currently involved in the study of
survivable systems requirements and architectures, and the development
of professional infrastructure for software engineers. She has
developed and taught numerous courses on software engineering topics,
both at universities and in professional education courses. Her
professional activities include Steering Committee Chair for the
International Conference on Requirements Engineering. She has a Ph D
Poster Presentation and Research Tool Demos
There will be ten posters and four research demos presented at RE'03.
Posters will be available for viewing throughout the conference, and
there will be two special sessions in the technical program for
presenters to give overviews of their work. The proceedings will contain
a two-page summary of each poster, and a one-page overview for each
Posters and Demos Session 1
NIMBUS: A Tool for Specification Centred Development
Mats Heimdahl, Mike Whalen, Jeff Thompson
University of Minnesota
FAUST: Formal Analysis Using Specification Tools
A. Rifaut, P. Massonet, J-F Molderez, C. Ponsard, P. Standik, CETIC
A. van Lamsweerde, Universite catholique de Louvain
SMaRT - Scenario Management and Requirements Tool
William Stufflebeam, Annie Anton, North Carolina State
Thomas Alspaugh, University of California, Irvine
Relating Practitioner Needs to Research Activities
Martin Feather, California Institute of Technology
Tim Menzies, West Virginia University
Judith Connelly, NASA IV&V Facility
Contrasting Use Case, Goal, and Scenario Analysis of Euronet System
Thomas Alspaugh, University of California, Irvine
Annie Anton, North Carolina State University
Trade-off Analysis between Security Policies for Java Mobile Codes and
Requirements for Java Application
Haruhiko Kaiya, Kouta Sasaki, Yasunori Maebashi, Kenji Kaijiri
Shinshu University, Japan
Bringing Usability to the Early Stages of Software Development
Luiz Marcio Cysneiros, Andre Kushniruk
York University, Canada
Posters and Demos Session 2
Goal-Oriented Idea Generation method for Requirements Elicitation
Kazuya Oshiro, Kenji Watahiki, Motoshi Saeki,
Tokyo Institute of Technology
Software Requirements for Architectured Systems
Elena Navaro, UCLM, Albacete, Spain
Isidro Ramos and Jennifer Perez, SUPV, Valencia, Spain
Market Driven Requirements Elicitation via Critical Success Chains
Tuure Tuunanen, Matti Rossi
Helsinki School of economics
Integrating RE Methods to Support Use Case Based Requirements
Neil Maiden, Sara Jones, and Mary Flynn
Centre for HCI Design, City University, London
Introducing Abuse Frames for Analysing Security Requirements
Luncheng Lin, Bashar Nuseibeh, Darrel Ince, Michael Jackson, The Open
Jonathan Moffett, University of York
An approach to Visualise and Reconcile Use Case Description
from Multiple Viewpoints
Debbie Richards, Anne-Britt Fure and Oscar Aguilera,
Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
Media-Assisted Product and Process Requirements Traceability in Supply
Matthias Jarke, Oliver Fritzen, Michalis Miatidis, Marcus Schlüter
Informatik V, RWTH Aachen,
Coming soon ...
The RE '03 Doctoral Symposium is a one-day workshop to be held immediately
preceding the main conference. Selected students will present their work and
receive constructive feedback from a panel of advisors and other Doctoral
Symposium students. Besides scientific matters, the students will also have the
opportunity to seek advice on various aspects of completing a PhD and performing
research as a young professional in requirements engineering.
The Proceedings of the RE'03 Doctoral Symposium will be published as an adjunct
to the Proceedings.
Doctoral Symposium Chair:
Mats Heimdahl, University of Minnesota, USA.
Daniel Berry, University of Waterloo, Canada.
Jeffrey Thompson, Guidant Corporation, USA.
Klaus Pohl, University of Essen, Germany.
Doctoral Student Presentations
Systematic Construction of Quality Models for Coarse-Grained COTS Components.
Juan Pablo Carvallo. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain.
Methods, Models and Tools for Cross-Organizational Workflow Requirements
Specification and Design.
Enzo Colombo. Politecnico di Milano, Italy.
A Goal-driven Role Engineering Process for Privacy-Aware RBAC Systems.
Qingfeng He. North Carolina State University, USA.
An Inquiry On Architectural Significant Requirements For An Enterprize Software Architecture
Åsa Lindström. Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.
An Empirical Study of Requirements Volatility: Causes, Impacts and Strategies.
Nurmuliani. University of Technology Sydney, Australia.
Towards a conceptual framework for requirements engineering for an evolutionary
Dulce T. Pumareja. University of Twente, The Netherlands.
A Framework for Pervasive Traceability.
Susanne A. Sherba. University of Colorado, USA.
Advice for Finishing that Damn Ph.D.
Daniel M. Berry. University of Waterloo, Canada.
I am Almost Done--Now What? The Academic Job Search.
Mats Heimdahl. University of Minnesota, USA.
Klaus Pohl. University of Essen, Germany.
Interviewing in Industry.
Jeffrey M. Thompson. Guidant Corporation, USA.
Tuesday Sept 9, 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm
Welcome reception with cash bar and hors d'oeuvres at the hotel.
Wednesday 10 September, 7pm - 10:30pm
||This evening event will be held in the newest wing at the
Monterey Aquarium, the Outer Bay Gallery. A strolling dinner
will be provided, allowing you to mingle in a place that was
a main set in the movie ``Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home'',
while viewing the awesome sights afforded by the largest window
in the world, affording underwater sightings of animals rarely
seen in aquariums.