CIS 555 Discussion Responses

There are two discussions here that need to be responded to thoroughly. Responses must be on APA format 150+words 1-2 legitimate verifiable sources per response.

CIS555 discussion 1 post responses.
Respond to the colleagues posts regarding:
“Requirements Inspection and Validation” Please respond to the following:
• From the e-Activity, examine the possibility that a gap between the animated model and the original specification may exist. Propose how you would detect the gaps.
• Assess the pros and cons of having a large number of reviewers versus having a small number of viewers in the requirements inspection process. Determine whether you would use internal or external reviewers and explain why.

MH’s post states the following:

From the e-Activity, examine the possibility that a gap between the animated model and the original specification may exist. Propose how you would detect the gaps.
The Solidworks Simulation is a software application that allows users to create and conduct studies on submodels, a section of a larger model selected specifically for further analysis (Solidworks, 2012). This capability allows the use of animation-based validation (Lamsweerde, 2009, p.187).
The existence of a gap between the animated model and the original specification is always a possibility. The identification of this gap is what makes the validation process valuable to the development team. The requirement deficiencies can be identified before development begins and the costs of fixing the errors begin to grow exponentially.
To detect the gaps using animation-based validation techniques: First, analysts must first work with stakeholders to create a formal specification document. Next, analysts must work with stakeholders to identify the parts of the specification that will be turned into an executable model of the proposed system.  Then, test cases with sample data must be generated for the selected model.  When the model is ready, it can be turned over to expert users who can confirm if the proposed system will satisfy their identified needs (i.e., the system goals). If gaps are identified, analysts will then work with stakeholders to refine the requirements further and update the requirement documentation accordingly.
Assess the pros and cons of having a large number of reviewers versus having a small number of viewers in the requirements inspection process.
Although managing the inspection process would be more challenging, a larger number of reviewers from many different backgrounds would likely find many more defects within the requirements documentation. On the other hand, with the larger number of defects to analyzed, there will be many more “false positives” which will take additional time and resources to resolve. Regarding large requirements documents, the work can be shared more easily across a large group of reviewers. This improves the likelihood that the entire document will receive a thorough review without overburdening the reviewers. Small teams would need more time to review a large document which the schedule may not be able to accommodate.
Determine whether you would use internal or external reviewers and explain why.
When it is an option, I always prefer to have a mixture of both internal and external reviewers on my requirements documentation inspection teams. However, if forced to choose between internal reviewers and external reviewers, I would choose an external review team. My personal experience has been that external reviewers typically provide more unbiased feedback than internal reviewers.

References
Lamsweerde, A. van. (2009). Requirements engineering: From system goals to UML models to software specifications. West Sussex, England: John Wiley.
SolidWorks. (2012, September 12). SolidWorks 2013: Simulation Sub-Modeling and Incremental Meshing [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TGMkMEPIsQ

CIS555 discussion 2 post responses.
Respond to the colleagues posts regarding:
“Traceability and Change Control” Please respond to the following:
• Suppose a system had no traceability management present. Predict five problems that you believe could occur when change requests are made. 
• Suppose you were a project leader. Propose five methods that you would use to manage change requests. Select the method that you think would work best for you and defend your selection.

SP’s post states the following:

Revisions would be difficult as it is uneasy to trace back to where the problem initiated.  The scope of the entire project may be thrown off since the request came at an unexpected time.  The dependency link would be unuseful since it is not traceability.  Therefore is no indication if changing link A will affect changing link B. On another note, the entire system can be down for a period of time while the developers attempt to find the issue.  Making a change to the system may cause further issues to the system and create other problems (Lamsweerde, 2009).

Suppose you were a project leader. Propose five methods that you would use to manage change requests. Select the method that you think would work best for you and defend your selection.

A change request can come from a multitude of sources.  For instance, change requests can be business, technical, or stakeholder related.  One method is to expect/anticipate change and prepare for it.  Recognizing unstable requirements, that are prone to change early on, will assist the developers with change requests.  Another method is to include a change control process, which ensures that only authorized changes are implemented (Lamsweerde, 2009).  Preferably, I would choose the authorized change request method.  It seems as though with this process only the necessary changes will be approved and all other unnecessary changes would be filtered out.   

Reference:
Lamsweerde, A. (2009). Requirements Engineering: From system goals to UML models to software specifications. West Sussex, England: John Wiley.