Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
have an intimate understanding of what is needed, why
it is needed, who needs it and exactly how it should
work. Having any other group perform such work
defeats the purpose of the analysis.
Sometimes sales engineers or sales support groups will
aid the user in preparing the RFP and sometimes these
people are even independent consultants will be called
in to develop the requirements. This makes no sense;
it doesn't save money and it doesn't save time. Nor will
it ensure greater integrity. In fact, it produces the
reverse of these worthy goals since it forces the archi-
tect to design with hands tied.”
—From
Production Software That Works
, by
Behuniak, Iftikhar, Ahmad, and Courtright
Oversight
Most requirements gathering processes depend on the skills of the require-
ments analysts. Much has been written about how good requirements can
be gathered and there is little else to add here. Because this important
activity depends so heavily on the skills of an individual, or a few
individuals, there should be a control process in place to oversee it.
Normally, the way the process works is for the analyst to write the
requirements, which the business user signs off. That is not sufficient
because the business user is only one of the stakeholders and he or she
may be satisfied with the requirements as long as they reflect his or her
views. There should be a review of the requirements by a more complete
set of stakeholders. This external review process can stay at whatever
level of detail the project and individual bandwidth limitations allow.
Political dynamics and the desire to avoid getting caught in an endless
cycle of reviews often discourage this oversight, yet it is an essential part
of the process, especially for critical initiatives.
Sign-Offs
Sign-offs matter from a legal standpoint. From a practical point of view,
they matter less. A sign-off does not make a requirements document any
better. It is as good or bad as it is. It still has all the pr oblems of
