The Community for Technology Leaders
Requirements Engineering, IEEE International Conference on (2000)
Schaumburg, Illinois
June 19, 2000 to June 23, 2000
ISSN: 1097-0592
ISBN: 0-7695-0565-1
pp: 75
Nancy R. Mead , Carnegie Mellon University
ABSTRACT
I have worked in the requirements engineering area as a practitioner and also as a researcher. I have observed both obstacles and incentives to adopting new requirements engineering methods. This subject has been explored previously [1] [2], but remains an interesting area for those of us who would like to effect change.Practitioners must often deal with the obstacles associated with introducing new methods, and need help from researchers in convincing their project teams and management to try something new. Researchers, on the other hand, tend to feel that they are done and ready to move on to the next challenge, after they have produced a few journal articles and some prototype tools.Researchers and practitioners seldom work together on projects, so a gulf must be overcome in order for the researchers to understand what is useful to the practitioners, and for the practitioners to understand exactly what benefits can be derived from trying something new.Many of the obstacles and incentives result from the perceptions of researchers, practitioners, and management. Technology transition is successful when these perceptions are brought into alignment, and when the new method supports the needs of all three groups.
INDEX TERMS
CITATION

N. R. Mead, "Why Is It so Difficult to Introduce Requirements Engineering Research Results into Mainstream Requirements Engineering Practice?," Requirements Engineering, IEEE International Conference on(ICRE), Schaumburg, Illinois, 2000, pp. 75.
doi:10.1109/ICRE.2000.855592
83 ms
(Ver 3.3 (11022016))