To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation
Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Mich, Luisa [verfasserIn] Sakhnini, Victoria [verfasserIn] Berry, Daniel [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2023 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Information & software technology - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987, 160 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:160 |
DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
ELV009698698 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | ELV009698698 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230926162940.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230530s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)ELV009698698 | ||
035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 330 |a 004 |q VZ |
084 | |a 85.00 |2 bkl | ||
084 | |a 54.50 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Mich, Luisa |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Group work | |
650 | 4 | |a Individual work | |
650 | 4 | |a Requirements elicitation | |
650 | 4 | |a Requirements idea generation | |
650 | 4 | |a Requirements engineering | |
650 | 4 | |a Software engineering | |
700 | 1 | |a Sakhnini, Victoria |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Berry, Daniel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Information & software technology |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 |g 160 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320419185 |w (DE-600)2002332-7 |w (DE-576)259271160 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:160 |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 85.00 |j Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines |q VZ |
936 | b | k | |a 54.50 |j Programmierung: Allgemeines |q VZ |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 160 |
author_variant |
l m lm v s vs d b db |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
michluisasakhninivictoriaberrydaniel:2023----:oruontorugopiefreur |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2023 |
bklnumber |
85.00 54.50 |
publishDate |
2023 |
allfields |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 doi (DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl Mich, Luisa verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 aut To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering Sakhnini, Victoria verfasserin aut Berry, Daniel verfasserin aut Enthalten in Information & software technology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 160 Online-Ressource (DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 nnns volume:160 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 85.00 Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines VZ 54.50 Programmierung: Allgemeines VZ AR 160 |
spelling |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 doi (DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl Mich, Luisa verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 aut To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering Sakhnini, Victoria verfasserin aut Berry, Daniel verfasserin aut Enthalten in Information & software technology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 160 Online-Ressource (DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 nnns volume:160 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 85.00 Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines VZ 54.50 Programmierung: Allgemeines VZ AR 160 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 doi (DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl Mich, Luisa verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 aut To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering Sakhnini, Victoria verfasserin aut Berry, Daniel verfasserin aut Enthalten in Information & software technology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 160 Online-Ressource (DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 nnns volume:160 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 85.00 Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines VZ 54.50 Programmierung: Allgemeines VZ AR 160 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 doi (DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl Mich, Luisa verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 aut To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering Sakhnini, Victoria verfasserin aut Berry, Daniel verfasserin aut Enthalten in Information & software technology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 160 Online-Ressource (DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 nnns volume:160 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 85.00 Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines VZ 54.50 Programmierung: Allgemeines VZ AR 160 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 doi (DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl Mich, Luisa verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 aut To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering Sakhnini, Victoria verfasserin aut Berry, Daniel verfasserin aut Enthalten in Information & software technology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987 160 Online-Ressource (DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 nnns volume:160 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 85.00 Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines VZ 54.50 Programmierung: Allgemeines VZ AR 160 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Information & software technology 160 volume:160 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Information & software technology 160 volume:160 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
bklname |
Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines Programmierung: Allgemeines |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering |
dewey-raw |
330 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Information & software technology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Mich, Luisa @@aut@@ Sakhnini, Victoria @@aut@@ Berry, Daniel @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2023-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
320419185 |
dewey-sort |
3330 |
id |
ELV009698698 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV009698698</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230926162940.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230530s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV009698698</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">85.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mich, Luisa</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Group work</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Individual work</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements elicitation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements idea generation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Software engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sakhnini, Victoria</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Berry, Daniel</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Information & software technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987</subfield><subfield code="g">160</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320419185</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2002332-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)259271160</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:160</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">85.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Programmierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">160</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Mich, Luisa |
spellingShingle |
Mich, Luisa ddc 330 bkl 85.00 bkl 54.50 misc Group work misc Individual work misc Requirements elicitation misc Requirements idea generation misc Requirements engineering misc Software engineering To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
authorStr |
Mich, Luisa |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)320419185 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
330 - Economics 004 - Data processing & computer science |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut |
collection |
elsevier |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
topic_title |
330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation Group work Individual work Requirements elicitation Requirements idea generation Requirements engineering Software engineering |
topic |
ddc 330 bkl 85.00 bkl 54.50 misc Group work misc Individual work misc Requirements elicitation misc Requirements idea generation misc Requirements engineering misc Software engineering |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 330 bkl 85.00 bkl 54.50 misc Group work misc Individual work misc Requirements elicitation misc Requirements idea generation misc Requirements engineering misc Software engineering |
topic_browse |
ddc 330 bkl 85.00 bkl 54.50 misc Group work misc Individual work misc Requirements elicitation misc Requirements idea generation misc Requirements engineering misc Software engineering |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Information & software technology |
hierarchy_parent_id |
320419185 |
dewey-tens |
330 - Economics 000 - Computer science, knowledge & systems |
hierarchy_top_title |
Information & software technology |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)320419185 (DE-600)2002332-7 (DE-576)259271160 |
title |
To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV009698698 (ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6 |
title_full |
To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
author_sort |
Mich, Luisa |
journal |
Information & software technology |
journalStr |
Information & software technology |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
300 - Social sciences 000 - Computer science, information & general works |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2023 |
contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
author_browse |
Mich, Luisa Sakhnini, Victoria Berry, Daniel |
container_volume |
160 |
class |
330 004 VZ 85.00 bkl 54.50 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Mich, Luisa |
doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 |
normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-0018-6883 |
normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883 |
dewey-full |
330 004 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
to group or not to group? group sizes for requirements elicitation |
title_auth |
To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
abstract |
Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. |
abstractGer |
Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
title_short |
To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Sakhnini, Victoria Berry, Daniel |
author2Str |
Sakhnini, Victoria Berry, Daniel |
ppnlink |
320419185 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229 |
up_date |
2024-07-07T00:03:05.716Z |
_version_ |
1803876392728788992 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV009698698</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230926162940.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230530s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107229</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV009698698</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0950-5849(23)00083-6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">85.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mich, Luisa</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-0018-6883</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">To group or not to group? Group sizes for requirements elicitation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Context: Requirement elicitation can be done by individuals or by groups. Computer-based system development life-cycle models suggest having people working together for many steps. Also, recommendations about analysis and design methods indicate that some processes could take advantage of group work. In requirements engineering, groups are suggested for requirements elicitation.Objectives: From the software and the requirements engineering viewpoints, and in turn for companies, a relevant overall research question is “What is a suitable size for a requirements elicitation group?” Our goal was to answer this question, first by looking for available guidelines in textbooks and secondly by investigating requirements elicitation in companies.Method: To address the research question, we conducted two studies. The first was a review of most widely adopted software and requirements engineering textbooks. The second was a study aimed at identifying factors affecting group size for requirements elicitation, based on an online questionnaire submitted to professional analysts.Results: The review of the textbooks showed that very few give advice on the number of analysts to involve in requirements elicitation sessions. When they do, guidelines are quite general and not supported by empirical data. According to data gathered from the questionnaire, most companies use and suggest using small groups. Data also allowed identifying four categories of factors useful to make decisions about requirements elicitation group sizes: people, relation, project, and output.Conclusion: Both the textbook review and the data from the questionnaire say that it is better to aim for small groups than to have individual analysts working separately. The ideal number of analysts for a requirements elicitation session appears to be 2, but large groups are necessary in some cases. Factors in all the four categories have to be considered in deciding the size of groups.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Group work</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Individual work</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements elicitation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements idea generation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Requirements engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Software engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sakhnini, Victoria</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Berry, Daniel</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Information & software technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1987</subfield><subfield code="g">160</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320419185</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2002332-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)259271160</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:160</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">85.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Betriebswirtschaft: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Programmierung: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">160</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.39777 |