Contemporary Challenges in Requirements Discovery and Validation: Two Case Studies in Complex Environments - Intentional Perspectives on Information Systems Engineering - page 45

In addition, the university engaged the services of a consulting firm that special-
izes in enterprise system implementations within the higher education marketplace.
The consulting team adopted a structure directly mirroring that of the internal
project team. A Project Manager was appointed to oversee all project management
functions in conjunction with the Project Director. Similarly, the company provided
consulting personnel to fill the roles of Functional and Technical Consultants, sup-
porting the efforts of their university counterparts. Finally, an Account Manager
worked directly with the executive steering committee and made regular recom-
mendations to the Project Director.
RE Processes. The determination of requirements on the SIS project reflected a
diversity of efforts engaged by different project members. These team members did
not adopt a single formal approach to the elicitation and specification of require-
ments. Rather, the team processes relating to requirements evolved over the course
of the project. Furthermore, the processes and artifacts employed were often the
product of collaborative development by multiple project team members.
Prior to the initiation of the project, several baseline functional and non-
functional requirements had been established. In large part, this was a reflection
of the vendor selection. Since the university had selected PeopleSoft for implemen-
tation and completed the installation of two of the three core modules, the vendor
platform was established in advance. Thus, a large number of the requirements were
embodied in the PeopleSoft system - both the SIS module itself and the existing
Financial and Human Capital Management components implemented. In addition,
several high-level requirements were determined during initial project planning
through interactions with the executive steering committee. To some degree, these
requirements reflected assumptions about the environments necessary to support an
effective implementation. In the Project Charter document developed at the initi-
ation of the project, these preliminary requirements are categorized as Technical,
Functional, Financial (i.e., budgetary), and Personnel.
The central effort at requirements elicitation in the early stages of the SIS project
was called the Interactive Design and Prototype (IDP) process. The IDP process
sought to inform key stakeholders about the functionality of PeopleSoft and to
elicit statements of needs for customization or modification. Thus, IDP was at its
core what a gap analysis. The IDP process consisted of JAD-style focus group dis-
cussions scheduled with every one of the over 100 functional offices on campus . 2
Initiated by the Functional Leads (University and Consultant) and functional sub-
ject matter experts, the IDP sessions included the Technical Experts and focused on
the input of office personnel regarding the appropriateness of the PeopleSoft sys-
tem for their business functions. The result of each session was the articulation of
desired modifications. Initially scheduled for a six-month period, the IDP phase of
2 We use the phrase “JAD-style sessions” to convey the idea of engagement between the design
team and user representatives around process design questions. However, the IDP sessions were
oriented toward the gap identification rather than a formal design effort.