Abstract
[Context and Motivation] Agile developments follow an iterative procedure with alternating requirements planning and implementation phases boxed into sprints. For every sprint, requirements from the product backlog are selected and appropriate test measures are chosen. [Question/problem] Both activities should carefully consider the implementation risk of each requirement. In favor of a successful project, risky requirements should either be deferred or extra test effort should be dedicated on them. Currently, estimating the implementation risk of requirements is mainly based on gut decisions. [Principal ideas/results] The complexity of the graph spanned by dependency and decomposition relations across requirements can be an indicator of implementation risk. In this paper, we propose three metrics to assess and quantify requirement relations. We conducted a study with five industry-scale agile projects and found that the proposed metrics are in fact suitable for estimating implementation risk of requirements. [Contribution] Our study of heterogeneous, industrial development projects delivers for the first time evidence that the complexity of a requirements traceability graph is correlated with the error-proneness of the implementing source code. The proposed traceability metrics provide an indicator for requirements’ implementation risks. This indicator supports product owners and developers in requirement prioritization and test measure selection.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bansiya, J., Davis, C.G.: A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(1), 4–17 (2002)
Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., et al.: The agile manifesto (2001)
Boehm, B., Basili, V.R.: Software defect reduction top 10 list. Computer 34(1), 135–137 (2001)
Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Using risk to balance agile and plan-driven methods. Computer 36(6), 57–66 (2003)
Breusch, T.S., Pagan, A.R.: A simple test for heteroscedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1287–1294 (1979)
Briand, L.C., Wüst, J., Daly, J.W., Victor Porter, D.: Exploring the relationships between design measures and software quality in object-oriented systems. Journal of Systems and Software 51(3), 245–273 (2000)
Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R., Huyvaert, K.P.: Aic model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 65(1), 23–35 (2011)
Cao, L., Ramesh, B.: Agile requirements engineering practices: An empirical study. IEEE Software 25(1), 60–67 (2008)
Cohn, M.: Agile estimating and planning. Pearson Education (2006)
Costello, R.J., Liu, D.B.: Metrics for requirements engineering. Journal of Systems and Software 29(1), 39–63 (1995)
Dick, J.: Rich traceability. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 18–23 (2002)
Fenton, N.E., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software metrics: a rigorous and practical approach. PWS Publishing Co. (1998)
Git. http://git-scm.com/
Graves, T.L., Karr, A.F., Marron, J.S., Siy, H.: Predicting fault incidence using software change history. IEEE TSE 26(7), 653–661 (2000)
Hull, E., Jackson, K., Dick, J.: Requirements engineering. Springer, London (2011)
Jaber, K., Sharif, B., Liu, C.: A study on the effect of traceability links in software maintenance. IEEE Access 1, 726–741 (2013)
Leffingwell, D.: Agile software requirements: lean requirements practices for teams, programs, and the enterprise. Addison-Wesley Professional (2010)
Mäder, P., Egyed, A.: Do developers benefit from requirements traceability when evolving and maintaining a software system? EmpSE, pp. 1–29 (2014)
Mäder, P., Gotel, O., Philippow, I.: Getting back to basics: promoting the use of a traceability information model in practice. In: ICSE Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, TEFSE, pp. 21–25. IEEE (2009)
Mäder, P., Gotel, O., Philippow, I.: Motivation matters in the traceability trenches. In: Proc. of the 17th IEEE RE conference, pp. 143–148. IEEE (2009)
Marinescu, R.: Measurement and quality in object-oriented design. In: Proc. of the 21st IEEE Int. Conference on Software Maintenance, pp. 701–704. IEEE (2005)
Murgia, A., Concas, G., Tonelli, R., Turnu, I.: Empirical study of software quality evolution in open source projects using agile practices. In: Proc. of the 1st International Symposium on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics, p. 11 (2009)
Nagappan, N., Ball, T., Zeller, A.: Mining metrics to predict component failures. In: Proc. of the 28th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pp. 452–461. ACM (2006)
Pfleeger, S.L., Bohner, S.A.: A framework for software maintenance metrics. In: Proc. of Software Maintenance conference, pp. 320–327. IEEE (1990)
Rempel, P., Mäder, P., Kuschke, T.: An empirical study on project-specific traceability strategies. In: Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 195–204. IEEE (2013)
Rempel, P., Mäder, P., Kuschke, T., Cleland-Huang, J.: Mind the gap: assessing the conformance of software traceability to relevant guidelines. In: Proc. of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), India (2014)
Rempel, P., Mäder, P., Kuschke, T., Philippow, I.: Requirements traceability across organizational boundaries - a survey and taxonomy. In: Doerr, J., Opdahl, A.L. (eds.) REFSQ 2013. LNCS, vol. 7830, pp. 125–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Sedigh-Ali, S., Ghafoor, A., Paul, R.A.: Software engineering metrics for cots-based systems. Computer 34(5), 44–50 (2001)
Sillitti, A., Ceschi, M., Russo, B., Succi, G.: Managing uncertainty in requirements: a survey in documentation-driven and agile companies. In: 11th IEEE International Symposium on Software Metrics, p. 10. IEEE (2005)
Subramanyam, R., Krishnan, M.S.: Empirical analysis of ck metrics for object-oriented design complexity: Implications for software defects. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29(4), 297–310 (2003)
Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, H., Fukazawa, Y.: A metrics suite for measuring reusability of software components. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International of Software Metrics Symposium, pp. 211–223. IEEE (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rempel, P., Mäder, P. (2015). Estimating the Implementation Risk of Requirements in Agile Software Development Projects with Traceability Metrics. In: Fricker, S., Schneider, K. (eds) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. REFSQ 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9013. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16101-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16101-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16100-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16101-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)