Requirement ambiguity not as important as expected: results of an empirical evaluation

  • Authors:

  • Erik Jan Philippo;Werner Heijstek;Bas Kruiswijk;Michel R. V. Chaudron;Daniel M. Berry

  • Affiliations:

  • Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands;Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands,Software Improvement Group, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Twynstra Gudde, Amersfoort, The Netherlands;Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands,Joint Computer Science and Engineering Department of Chalmers, University of Technology and University of ...;Cheriton School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

  • Venue:
  • REFSQ'13 Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality
  • Year:
  • 2013

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

[Context and motivation] Requirement ambiguity is seen as an important factor for project success. However, empirical data about this relation are limited. [Question/problem] We analyze how ambiguous requirements relate to the success of software projects. [Principal ideas/results] Three methods are used to study the relation between requirement ambiguity and project success. First, data about requirements and project outcome were collected for 40 industrial projects. We find that, based on a correlation analysis, that the level of ambiguity in the requirements for a project does not correlate with the project's success. Second, using a root-cause analysis, we observe that ambiguity does not cause more defects during the test phase. Third, expert interviews were conducted to validate these results. This resulted in a framework that outlines factors influencing requirement-ambiguity risk. [Contribution] Empirical data are presented about the relationship between requirement ambiguity and project success. A framework is created to describe nine factors that increase or mitigate requirement-ambiguity risk.