05 Making Tacit Requirements Explicit

1,541 views
1,465 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,541
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

05 Making Tacit Requirements Explicit

  1. 1. Making Tacit Requirements Explict 1 Lancaster University 2 The Open University Gacitua, R. 1 , Ma, L. 2 , Nuseibeh, B. 2 , Piwek, P. 2 , de Roeck, A. 2 , Rouncefield, M. 1 , Sawyer, P. 1 , Willis, A. 2 and Yang, H. 2
  2. 2. Tacit knowledge <ul><li>Knowing more than we can tell ( Polanyi ) </li></ul>Tacit knowledge Explicit knowledge <ul><li>Some tacit knowledge may never be articul able </li></ul><ul><li>Some articulated knowledge can, over time, become not articulated </li></ul>Not articulated Articulated Externalisation (Nonaka, Takeuchi and Umemoto )
  3. 3. Tacit Knowledge in RE <ul><li>We rely on tacit knowledge to communicate effectively </li></ul><ul><li>There are practical limits to what we can elicit </li></ul><ul><li>Yet as engineers, we’re taught to make our specification precise, explicit and complete </li></ul>
  4. 4. Tacit Knowledge in RE <ul><li>We need a workable definition of TK for RE </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Maiden and Rugg † distinguish between: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tacit knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>essentially Polanyi’s knowledge acquired by a process of tacit knowing. Being able to enact the ‘performance’ not the same as being able to articulate what is known. </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Semi-tacit knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>knowledge that is tractable to recovery using cues, e.g.: </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Menu items in a spreadsheet </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Taken-for-granted knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Concealed knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>† Maiden, N, Rugg, G.: AC RE: selecting methods for requirements acquisition, Software Engineering Journal, 11 (3) May 1996.
  5. 5. Tacit Knowledge in RE Maybe because stakehodlers share cognitive TK Maybe because developers worked in this domain before Maybe because the analysts are creative Problem domain Req. spec n . Development Analysts Stakeholders Developers
  6. 6. Requirements discoverable. Requirements discovered. Stakeholder Semi-tacit Explicit Requirements discoverable. Requirements discoverable with difficulty. Requirements not discoverable. Tacit Analyst Knows domain New to domain Traditional techniques - e.g. interviews <ul><li>Indirect via observable phenomena </li></ul><ul><li>in domain: ethnography </li></ul><ul><li>in artifacts: MaTREx </li></ul>Discovery Active techniques - e.g. use cases, goal workshops, prototyping, modeling
  7. 7. Tracing requirements provenance <ul><li>Knowledge can be lost during the synthesis of requirements. </li></ul><ul><li>Upstream tracing between sources and requirements important for understanding how and why user requirements formulated. </li></ul><ul><li>Post-hoc recovery of trace links is typically necessary, but difficult. </li></ul>
  8. 8. PROSPECT
  9. 9. Unprovenanced requirements
  10. 10. Where do unprovenanced requirements come from? <ul><li>Sources are lost </li></ul><ul><li>Sources in non-text media </li></ul><ul><li>Sources in peoples’ heads </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Analyst assumptions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Symptom of missing domain knowledge? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Symptom of tacit knowledge? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Analyst invention </li></ul></ul>?
  11. 11. Concept identification with OntoLancs - the outer cycle <ul><li>Ensemble methods are compositions of “primitive” NLP techniques </li></ul>
  12. 12. Concept identification with OntoLancs - the inner cycle <ul><li>Assembly and evaluation of ensemble methods </li></ul>
  13. 13. OntoLancs example
  14. 14. Presupposition Analysis
  15. 15. Conclusions <ul><li>Our existing work on tracing requirements provenance turns out to have some relevance to identifying evidence for the presence of tacit knowledge. </li></ul><ul><li>Now we want to see how to understand what effect that has in the downstream requirements. </li></ul><ul><li>See how work from others in RE and from knowledge management, ontology engineering and organisational memory be used to better understand tacit knowledge and tacit requirements. </li></ul>

×