The State-of-Practice in Requirements Elicitation: An Extended Interview Study at 12 Companies

TL;DR

This study investigates current requirements elicitation practices in industry through interviews with practitioners, revealing common techniques, stakeholder involvement patterns, and prevalent challenges such as stakeholder understanding and requirements instability.

Contribution

It provides empirical insights into real-world requirements elicitation practices across multiple companies, highlighting the gap between academic proposals and industry implementation.

Findings

Group interaction techniques are most common for elicitation.

Customers are involved in most cases, except in market-driven organizations.

Technical staff are more involved than business or strategic staff.

Abstract

Context. Requirements engineering remains a discipline that is faced with a large number of challenges, including the implementation of a requirements elicitation process in industry. Although several proposals have been suggested by researchers and academics, little is known of the practices that are actually followed in industry. Objective. We investigate the SoTA with respect to requirements elicitation, examining practitioners' practices. We focus on the techniques, the roles involved, and the challenges associated to the process. Method. We conducted an interview-based survey study involving 24 practitioners from 12 different Swedish IT companies. Results. We found that group interaction techniques, including meetings and workshops, are the most popular type of elicitation techniques that are employed by the practitioners, except in the case of small projects. We noted that customers are frequently involved in the elicitation process, except in the case of market-driven organizations. Technical staff (for example, developers and architects) are more frequently involved in the elicitation process compared to the involvement of business- or strategic staff. Finally, we identified a number of challenges with respect to stakeholders. These challenges include difficulties in understanding and prioritizing their needs. Further, it was noted that requirements instability (i.e., caused by changing needs or priorities) was a predominant challenge. These observations need to be interpreted in the context of the study. Conclusion. The relevant observations regarding the survey participants' experiences should be of interest to the industry; experiences that should be analyzed in the practitioners' context. Researchers may find evidence for the use of academic results in practice, thereby inspiring future theoretical work, as well as further empirical studies in the same area.