Advertisement

Compliance Gaps: A Requirements Elicitation Approach in the Context of System Evolution

  • Camille Salinesi
  • Anne Etien
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2817)

Abstract

Eliciting change requirements in the context of system evolution is different from eliciting requirements for a system developed from scratch. Indeed, there is a system and documentation that should be referred to. Therefore, the issue is not only to identify new functions, but to uncover and understand differences with the current situation. There is few approaches that systematise the identification and documentation of such change requirements. Our approach is based on the analysis at the model level of the fitness relationship between the business and the system. Our experience showed us that another kind of change requirements could also be found when asking the question of continuity at the instance level. The literature already proposes so called “modification policies" that allow to manage current instances of the system workflows and business processes when their model evolve. However, these approaches are not interested in the elicitation of the requirements that relate to these modification policies, but to the technical solutions that these policies provide. The position taken in this paper is that change requirements can be elicited by analysing system evolutions through modification policies at the instance level. The paper proposes to document these requirements using the same approach as other change requirements.

Keywords

Business Process Modification Policy Instance Level Business Requirement Sales Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Salinesi, C., Rolland, C.: Fitting Business Models to Systems Functionality Exploring the Fitness Relationship. In: Eder, J., Missikoff, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2681, pp. 16–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salinesi, C., Presso, M.J.: A Method to Analyse Changes in the Realisation of Business Intentions and Strategies for Information System Adaptation. In: Proceedings of EDOC 2002, Lausanne, Switzerland (September 2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rolland, C., Salinesi, C., Etien, A.: Eliciting Gaps in Requirements Change. To appear in Requirement Engineering Journal (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Etien, A., Salinesi, C.: Towards a Systematic Definition of Requirements for Software Evolution: A Case-study Driven Investigation. In: Proc of EMMSAD 2003 Velden, Austria (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sadiq, S.: Handling Dynamic Schema Change in Process Models. Australian Database Conference, Canberra, Australia. January 27- Febraury 02 (2000) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, C., Orlowska, M., Li., H.: Automating Handover in Dynamic Workflow Environments. In: Pernici, B., Thanos, C. (eds.) CAiSE 1998. LNCS, vol. 1413, p. 159. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bandinelli, S., Fuggetta, A., Ghezzi, C.: Software Process Model Evolution in the SPADE. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 19(12), 1128–1144 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jarke, M., Pohl, K.: Requirements Engineering in 2001: Managing a Changing Reality. IEEE Software Engineering Journal, 257–266 ((November 1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van der Aalst, W.: Generic Workflow Models: How to Handle Dynamic Change and Capture Management Information. In: Lenzerini, M., Dayal, U. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 115–126 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Conradi, R., Fernström, C., Fuggetta, A.: A Conceptual Framework for Evolving Software Process. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 18(4), 26–34 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M.: Architectural Considerations in Systems Supporting Dynamic Workflow Modification. In: Proceedings of the workshop on Software Architectures for Business Process Management at CAiSE 1999, Heidelberg, Germany, June14-18 (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Joeris, G., Herzog, O.: Managing Evolving Workflow Specifications With Schema Versioning and Migration Rules. TZI Technical Report 15, University of Bremen (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salinesi, C., Wäyrynen, J.: A Methodological Framework for Understanding IS Adaptation through Enterprise Change. In: Proceedings of OOIS 2002, 8th International Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems, Montpellier, France (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rolland, C., Prakash, N.: Matching ERP System Functionality to Customer Requirements. In: Proceedings of RE 2001, Toronto, Canada, pp. 66–75 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rolland, C., Prakash, N., Benjamen, A.: A Multi-Model View of process Modelling. Requirements Engineering Journal 4, 169–187 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Han, J.: Supporting Impact Analysis and Change Propagation in Software Engineering Environments. In Proceedings of 8th International Workshop on Software Technology and Engineering Practice (STEP 1997/CASE 1997), London, UK, July 1997, pp. 172–182 (1997) Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deruelle, L., Bouneffa, M., Goncalves, G., Nicolas, J.C.: Local and Federated Database Schemas Evolution An Impact Propagation Model. In: Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Soda, G., Tjoa, A.M. (eds.) DEXA 1999. LNCS, vol. 1677, pp. 902–911. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chauman, M.A., Kabaili, H., Keller, R.K., Lustman, F.: A Change Impact Model for Changeability Assessment in Object Oriented Software Systems. In: Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, IEEE Comput. Soc, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Camille Salinesi
    • 1
  • Anne Etien
    • 1
  1. 1.C.R.I.Université Paris 1 – SorbonneParisFrance

Personalised recommendations