Software for requirements management

13 Dec 2004 - 12:27pm
9 years ago
13 replies
928 reads
Dave Malouf
2005

Hey there folks,

What are people using (especially for in-house types) for requirements
management throughout the entire product management lifecycle:
1. input channels and research capture
2. concept capture
3. requirements definition
4. design docs
5. technical docs
6. QC test scripts
7. launch, rollout, marketing plans

Something that deals w/ workflow and lifecycle management
Has strong permissioning
Well designed (something I would WANT to use)
Understands that software requires a designer (sheesh!)
works well on pc and mac

-- dave

Comments

14 Dec 2004 - 9:23am
Alain D. M. G. ...
2003

We were supposed to uses Telelogic's DOORS. We all got the training
for it. We bought the licences. We had it installed. The project was
cancelled, so we never really got a chance to use it and practice with
it.

In theory it was supposed to meet all your points. In practice it was
so complex that we just skimmed parts of it in three days of intensive
training. Much more practice was needed to really understand how to
use it. I had the impression it might have been worth it for very
complex projects involving large numbers of persons inside and outside.

Alain V.

--- David Heller <dave at ixdg.org> a écrit :

> What are people using (especially for in-house types) for
> requirements
> management throughout the entire product management lifecycle:
> 1. input channels and research capture
> 2. concept capture
> 3. requirements definition
> 4. design docs
> 5. technical docs
> 6. QC test scripts
> 7. launch, rollout, marketing plans
>

__________________________________________________________
Lèche-vitrine ou lèche-écran ?
magasinage.yahoo.ca

15 Dec 2004 - 1:38pm
Pradyot Rai
2004

David Heller --
> What are people using (especially for in-house types) for requirements
> management throughout the entire product management lifecycle:

In my little experience with big and small sized groups, all of these
are not necessarily responsibility of requirement management. If you
tweak the words slightly, to "Product Management", I will accept it.
Req. Mgmt. is just one of the functions of PM.

> 1. input channels and research capture
> 2. concept capture
> 3. requirements definition
> 4. design docs
> 5. technical docs
> 6. QC test scripts
> 7. launch, rollout, marketing plans

I have seen IEEE Standards that recommends form and functions for 3,
4, 5. 1 & 2 are idiosyncratic to organizations and their power
structures. For example, one of the group I know, has "Requirement
Management" and "Usability dudes" both responsible for it, only
because the product needs user and ethnographic research as much as
enhancement of a particular business feature.

> Something that deals w/ workflow and lifecycle management
> Has strong permissioning
> Well designed (something I would WANT to use)

There's nothing specifically designed for workflows. Visio is the most
popular for these purposes. Most of the folks use "Modeling tools" for
workflow needs. All of them really suck. IMHO, workflow management
applications are pretty messed up domain and there are no
well-designed applications. So you decide.

There are some very powerful applications – Rational Suite, DOORS
being some of them. They allow you to help write and manage
requirements, allow to modal technical architecture, have the test
cases integrated etc. However there's a big hole in all these
applications – there's none which can involve 'Usability' or
'Designer' folks do their job being part of the loop (with very few
exceptions).

Having said that, these tools don't do any management for anybody.
They help you meet your goals, which needs to be defined first. So the
"processes" (and it's Artifacts, milestones, etc.) becomes more
important in managing product. If you have them, you can use, say,
DOORS to manage your UI Specifications, User Requirements and
Wireframes, too, as I am trying to do these days.

> Understands that software requires a designer (sheesh!)
> works well on pc and mac

There's nothing as such. Enterprise App world and Workflow management,
especially, does not recognize roles of Designers any differently
than, say, an Analyst. Although they do recognize Analysts, QA,
Developers, Technical Architects, as stakeholders, except designers.
So Designers have to make efforts to use them.

Prady

16 Dec 2004 - 1:34am
Adam Korman
2004

A couple of people have mentioned DOORS, which is basically a database
for managing requirements. In theory it does great things. It can
transform your whole organization and do everything under the sun. In
practice, I think DOORS is a nightmare, particularly from a designer's
point of view.

The good:
- requirements are uniquely tagged
- you can assign attributes to requirements
- history is tracked for individual requirements as well as entire
"modules"
- you can create links between requirements (and see incoming and
outgoing links)
- it has sophisticated searching and filtering features (of course,
they are overly-complex)

The bad:
- It is not designed for creating documents, so the editing, formatting
and output capabilities are crude at best. This is probably the worst
thing about the tool.
- The UI is miserable -- it is not just thoughtlessly designed, but
seems to have been maliciously twisted to impede your success. OK,
maybe this is the worst part.
- It seems to be opposed to dealing with images, finding unique and
surprising ways to mangle your hard work.
- It is really expensive.
- Although it touts to do most/all of the things on your checklist, our
organization uses it only for documenting software requirements. Even
in this "limited" use, we need someone devoted to being the DOORS
administrator. This is a FULL-TIME JOB.

If you have a choice, my advice is to avoid DOORS like the plague.

Regards, Adam

16 Dec 2004 - 7:44am
Alain D. M. G. ...
2003

Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
what other serious alternative is there?

--- Adam Korman <adamk at flexid.com> a écrit :
>
> A couple of people have mentioned DOORS, which is basically a
> database
> for managing requirements. In theory it does great things. It can
> transform your whole organization and do everything under the sun. In
>
> practice, I think DOORS is a nightmare, particularly from a
> designer's
> point of view.
> If you have a choice, my advice is to avoid DOORS like the plague.
>

__________________________________________________________
Lèche-vitrine ou lèche-écran ?
magasinage.yahoo.ca

16 Dec 2004 - 8:34am
Narey, Kevin
2004

>Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming, what
other serious alternative is there?

Rational requisite pro. We're looking into the full rational suite and this
is the requirements database portion.

Kevin

**********************************************************************
gedas united kingdom limited
Registered in England no. 1371338

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and it may be privileged.

It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom it is addressed.

If you have received this in error, please contact the sender
and delete the material immediately.
**********************************************************************

16 Dec 2004 - 9:10am
Dave Malouf
2005

Did I mention that I'm on a budget.
The stuff we've been looking at is SpeedDev and FeaturePlan
Both of which would cost us less than $25k.
DOORS and Rational are way over the top for us and way beyond our budget.

-- dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesi
> gners.com
> [mailto:discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interac
tiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Narey, Kevin
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 8:35 AM
> To: 'Alain D. M. G. Vaillancourt'; Adam Korman; 'Interaction
> Designers'
> Subject: RE: [ID Discuss] Software for requirements management
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant
> quoted material.]
>
>
> >Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
> >what
> other serious alternative is there?
>
> Rational requisite pro. We're looking into the full rational
> suite and this is the requirements database portion.
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> gedas united kingdom limited
> Registered in England no. 1371338
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
> and it may be privileged.
>
> It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> to whom it is addressed.
>
> If you have received this in error, please contact the sender
> and delete the material immediately.
> **********************************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interaction Design Discussion List
> discuss at ixdg.org
> --
> to change your options (unsubscribe or set digest):
> http://discuss.ixdg.org/
> --
> Questions: lists at ixdg.org
> --
> Announcement Online List (discussion list members get
> announcements already) http://subscribe-announce.ixdg.org/
> --
> http://ixdg.org/
>

16 Dec 2004 - 10:15am
Listera
2004

Alain D. M. G. Vaillancourt:

> Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
> what other serious alternative is there?

Separating design from programming?

Ziya
Nullius in Verba

16 Dec 2004 - 10:18am
Elizabeth Bacon
2003

I've mentioned it before in response to this same question to the list, so
I'll mention it again:

I recently was introduced to a very sweet product called FocalPoint. It's
made by a Swedish company; see:
http://www.focalpoint.se/products/index_en.html

It's a web-based tool for managing product development. It has lots of
features, including requirements management, issue tracking and reporting,
and nifty graphical tools that help prioritize issues & improvements
according to various criteria.

It slices, it dices - for only $19.95! No, j/k, I have no idea how much it
costs. Maybe if somebody here checks it out more deeply, they could let us
know.

Cheers,
Liz

-----Original Message-----
From:
discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesign
ers.com]On Behalf Of David Heller
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:10 AM
To: 'Interaction Designers'
Subject: RE: [ID Discuss] Software for requirements management

[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]

Did I mention that I'm on a budget.
The stuff we've been looking at is SpeedDev and FeaturePlan
Both of which would cost us less than $25k.
DOORS and Rational are way over the top for us and way beyond our budget.

-- dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesi
> gners.com
> [mailto:discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interac
tiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Narey, Kevin
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 8:35 AM
> To: 'Alain D. M. G. Vaillancourt'; Adam Korman; 'Interaction
> Designers'
> Subject: RE: [ID Discuss] Software for requirements management
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant
> quoted material.]
>
>
> >Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
> >what
> other serious alternative is there?
>
> Rational requisite pro. We're looking into the full rational
> suite and this is the requirements database portion.
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> gedas united kingdom limited
> Registered in England no. 1371338
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
> and it may be privileged.
>
> It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> to whom it is addressed.
>
> If you have received this in error, please contact the sender
> and delete the material immediately.
> **********************************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interaction Design Discussion List
> discuss at ixdg.org
> --
> to change your options (unsubscribe or set digest):
> http://discuss.ixdg.org/
> --
> Questions: lists at ixdg.org
> --
> Announcement Online List (discussion list members get
> announcements already) http://subscribe-announce.ixdg.org/
> --
> http://ixdg.org/
>

_______________________________________________
Interaction Design Discussion List
discuss at ixdg.org
--
to change your options (unsubscribe or set digest): http://discuss.ixdg.org/
--
Questions: lists at ixdg.org
--
Announcement Online List (discussion list members get announcements already)
http://subscribe-announce.ixdg.org/
--
http://ixdg.org/

16 Dec 2004 - 10:49am
Alain D. M. G. ...
2003

--- Listera <listera at rcn.com> a écrit :

> > Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
> > what other serious alternative is there?
>
> Separating design from programming?
>

Because this is a huge bureaucratic organization with programmers
separate from designers in their own divisions and because we also have
external suppliers for some of the design and other external companies
for most of the programming (in addition to internal designers and
programmers) they are already too separated. We wanted to unite them
with a common tool.

__________________________________________________________
Lèche-vitrine ou lèche-écran ?
magasinage.yahoo.ca

16 Dec 2004 - 10:58am
Elizabeth Bacon
2003

Hi there,

Sorry, the URL below is out-of-date. Try: http://www.focalpoint.se/

Cheers,
Liz

-----Original Message-----
From: Elizabeth Bacon
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 7:18 AM
To: 'Interaction Designers'
Subject: RE: [ID Discuss] Software for requirements management

I've mentioned it before in response to this same question to the list, so
I'll mention it again:

I recently was introduced to a very sweet product called FocalPoint. It's
made by a Swedish company; see:
http://www.focalpoint.se/products/index_en.html

It's a web-based tool for managing product development. It has lots of
features, including requirements management, issue tracking and reporting,
and nifty graphical tools that help prioritize issues & improvements
according to various criteria.

It slices, it dices - for only $19.95! No, j/k, I have no idea how much it
costs. Maybe if somebody here checks it out more deeply, they could let us
know.

Cheers,
Liz

16 Dec 2004 - 10:00am
Angus Miller
2004

Hi there,

Here are 3 products I know of - not used them personally but currently use
other products of two of the firms. All are windows only.

1. Borland Caliber: http://www.borland.com/caliber/

2. ActiveFocus: http://www.xapware.com/ActiveFocus.htm

3. AQDevTeam: http://www.automatedqa.com/products/aqdevteam/index.asp

Angus Miller

> What are people using (especially for in-house types) for requirements
> management throughout the entire product management lifecycle:
> 1. input channels and research capture
> 2. concept capture
> 3. requirements definition
> 4. design docs
> 5. technical docs
> 6. QC test scripts
> 7. launch, rollout, marketing plans
>

17 Dec 2004 - 3:48am
Peter Boersma
2003

Ziya wrote:

> > Yes, but if your organization is doing object-oriented programming,
> > what other serious alternative is there?
>
> Separating design from programming?

<buzzer> Unless you know a whole lot about programming (and software
maintenance) and the technical environment (and its maintenance), both of
which are recommended but not always feasible, I would suggest that software
designers sit in on the design phase. They are designers too, you see.

Instead I'd say: Separate the software requirements from the software
design.
As with front-end requirements, software requirements should be kept
technology "ignorant" for as long as possible. That allows all kinds of
designers to participate in the design phase, because requirements come from
all directions too.

Peter
--
Peter Boersma - Senior Information Architect - EzGov
Rijnsburgstraat 11 - 1059AT Amsterdam - The Netherlands
t: +31(0)20 7133881 - f: +31(0)20 7133799 - m: +31(0)6 15072747
mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com - http://www.ezgov.com

17 Dec 2004 - 9:07am
ralph lord
2004

Amen and Amen to what Peter wrote. We employ this approach exclusively
and find it to be the most successful way to engage.

RL

-----Original Message-----
From:
discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesign
ers.com] On Behalf Of Peter Boersma

Instead I'd say: Separate the software requirements from the software
design.
As with front-end requirements, software requirements should be kept
technology "ignorant" for as long as possible. That allows all kinds of
designers to participate in the design phase, because requirements come
from
all directions too.

Peter

Syndicate content Get the feed