Tom Gilb

Software and systems engineering practitioners have the option to work with a very wide range of requirements specification methods. I view these as requirements languages. A subset of practitioners additionally has a compelling interest in using requirements methods that are suitable for very large-scale enterprise projects.^1-4

Design reviews would benefit from the support of Specification Quality Control (SQC). By the use of SQC with a set of relevant design review rules, it should be possible to ensure prior to a design review that all the relevant information for a review is present in the design specifications, and that all the minimum review criteria are met. This will ensure management time is not wasted and aid better decision‐making.In addition, this paper outlines the impact of Evolutionary Project Management (Evo) on the design review process.

Outsourcing differs from other development because there is bound to be a contractual relationship, probably a geographic distance, a different sense of loyalty, language misunderstandings, cultural differences, reluctance to speak up to the client – and many other associated problems. Good requirements are always a problem, but outsourcing increases the problems, and makes even great demands on the requirements specification. The payoff for doing good requirements is greater, and the penalty for not doing them is more threatening.I am going to argue that we need to make use of far more explicit background specification for each requirement, a page or more of specification for each requirement. I will argue that this is a necessary investment – because failure to do so will probably cost far more – sooner or later. I will argue that failure to be more detailed than normal will be counted in the clients disfavor in any legal proceedings trying to determine responsibility for failure of the project.