Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Documenting Relations Between Requirements and Design Decisions: A Case Study on Design Session Transcripts

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 9619))

Abstract

Context/Motivation: Developers make many important decisions as they address given requirements during system design. Each decision is explained and justified by decision-related knowledge. Typically, this knowledge is neither captured in a structured way, nor linked to the respective requirements in detail. Then, it is not obvious, how design decisions realize the given requirements and whether they further refine or shape them. Thus, the relations and alignment of requirements and design cannot be assessed properly. Problem/Question: While there are several studies on decision-making in general, there does not exist a study uncovering how decision-related knowledge emerges based on requirements. Such a study is important to understand the intertwined relations of requirements and design decisions as well as how requirement descriptions could be enhanced with feedback from design decision-making. Principal Idea/Results: We applied a flexible documentation approach for decision-related knowledge on discussion transcripts of two design sessions with professional designers. We analyzed the discussions for decision-related knowledge and documented it together with its relations to the given requirements. Several complex and incrementally growing knowledge structures for decisions were found to emerge in relation to the given requirements. Also, we uncovered that decision-related knowledge contained uncertainties about requirements and further refined them. Contribution: Our study uncovers detailed relations between requirements and design decisions and thereby improves the understanding of their mutual impact on each other. We also derive recommendations for the cooperation between requirements engineers and designers in practice. In addition, we demonstrate that our documentation approach for decision-related knowledge provides a comprehensive view on decisions and their relations to requirements.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baker, A., van der Hoek, A.: Ideas, subjects, and cycles as lenses for understanding the software design process. Des. Stud. 31(6), 590–613 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ball, L.J., Onarheim, B., Christensen, B.T.: Design requirements, epistemic uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design. Des. Stud. 31(6), 567–589 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen, L., Babar, M.A., Nuseibeh, B.: Characterizing architecturally significant requirements. IEEE Softw. 30(2), 38–45 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cleland-Huang, J., Mirakhorli, M., Czauderna, A., Wieloch, M.: Decision-centric traceability of architectural concerns. In: International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, pp. 5–11. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Falessi, D., Cantone, G., Kazman, R., Kruchten, P.: Decision-making techniques for software architecture design. ACM Comput. Surv. 43(4), 1–28 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hesse, T.M., Gaertner, S., Roehm, T., Paech, B., Schneider, K., Bruegge, B.: Semiautomatic security requirements engineering and evolution using decision documentation, heuristics, and user monitoring. In: First International Workshop on Evolving Security and Privacy Requirements Engineering (ESPRE) at RE2014, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hesse, T.M., Kuehlwein, A., Paech, B., Roehm, T., Bruegge, B.: Documenting implementation decisions with code annotations. In: 27th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 152–157. KSI Research Inc (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hesse, T.M., Paech, B.: Supporting the collaborative development of requirements and architecture documentation. In: 3rd Internatioal Workshop on the Twin Peaks of Requirements and Architecture (TwinPeaks) at RE2013, pp. 22–26. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  9. van der Hoek, A., Petre, M., Baker, A.: Workshop “Studying Professional Software Design” at University of California, Irvine (2010). http://www.ics.uci.edu/design-workshop/. Accessed in October 2015

  10. Jackson, M.: Representing structure in a software system design. Des. Stud. 31(6), 545–566 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jansen, A., Bosch, J.: Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA), pp. 109–120. IEEE (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kavakli, E., Loucopoulos, P.: Information modeling methods and methodologies: advanced topics of database research. In: Krogstie, J., Halpin, T., Siau, K. (eds.) Goal Modeling in Requirements Engineering: Analysis and Critique of Current Methods, pp. 102–124. Idea Group Publishing, UK (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ko, A.J., Chilana, P.K.: Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports. In: Proceedings of the 2011 iConference, pp. 106–113 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kruchten, P., Lago, P., van Vliet, H.: Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. In: Hofmeister, C., Crnković, I., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4214, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Ngo, T., Ruhe, G.: Decision support in requirements engineering. In: Aurum, A., Wohlin, C. (eds.) Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, pp. 267–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nuseibeh, B.: Weaving together requirements and architectures. Computer 34(3), 115–119 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Paech, B., Delater, A., Hesse, T.M.: Integrating project and system knowledge management. In: Ruhe, G., Wohlin, C. (eds.) Software Project Management in a Changing World, pp. 157–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Petre, M., van der Hoek, A.: Software Designers in Action: A Human-Centric Look at Design Work. CRC Press, Saarbrucken (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Runeson, P., Höst, M., Rainer, A., Regnell, B.: Case Study Research in Software Engineering. Guidelines and Examples. Wiley, Hoboken (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Shaw, M.: The role of design spaces. Software 29(1), 46–50 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tang, A., Aleti, A., Burge, J., van Vliet, H.: What makes software design effective? Des. Stud. 31(6), 614–640 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tang, A., Babar, M.A., Gorton, I., Han, J.: A survey of architecture design rationale. J. Syst. Softw. 79(12), 1792–1804 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tang, A., Jin, Y., Han, J.: A rationale-based architecture model for design traceability and reasoning. J. Syst. Softw. 80(6), 918–934 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tyree, J., Akerman, A.: Architecture decisions: demystifying architecture. Software 22(2), 19–27 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Zannier, C., Chiasson, M., Maurer, F.: A model of design decision making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers. Inf. Softw. Technol. 49(6), 637–653 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was partially supported by the DFG (German Research Foundation) under the Priority Programme SPP1593: Design For Future — Managed Software Evolution. Results described in this paper are based upon videos and transcripts initially distributed for the 2010 international workshop “Studying Professional Software Design”, as partially supported by NSF grant CCF-0845840.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computer Science, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 326, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Tom-Michael Hesse & Barbara Paech

Authors
  1. Tom-Michael Hesse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Paech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom-Michael Hesse .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Maya Daneva

  2. Universidad Politècnica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

    Oscar Pastor

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Hesse, TM., Paech, B. (2016). Documenting Relations Between Requirements and Design Decisions: A Case Study on Design Session Transcripts. In: Daneva, M., Pastor, O. (eds) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. REFSQ 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9619. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30282-9_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30282-9_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30281-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30282-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation