Proceedings of IFIP 17th World Computer Congress, Montreal, Canada, 25-30 August 2002, p133-148. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
User requirements analysis
A review of supporting methods
Research School in Ergonomics and Human Factors Loughborough University, UK firstname.lastname@example.org
Serco Usability Services, UK email@example.com
Understanding user requirements is an integral part of information systems design and is critical to the success of interactive systems. However specifying these requirements is not so simple to achieve. This paper describes general methods to support user requirements analysis that can be adapted to a range of situations. Some brief case studies are described to illustrate how these methods have been applied in practice. user requirements, user-centred design, usability methods
Understanding user requirements is an integral part of information systems design and is critical to the success of interactive systems. It is now widely understood that successful systems and products begin with an understanding of the needs and requirements of the users. As specified in the ISO 13407 standard (ISO, 1999), user-centred design begins with a thorough understanding of the needs and requirements of the users. The benefits can include increased productivity, enhanced quality of work, reductions in support and training costs, and improved user satisfaction. Requirements analysis is not a simple process. Particular problems faced by the analyst are: • addressing complex organisational situations with many stakeholders • users and designers thinking along traditional lines, reflecting the current system and processes, rather than being innovative • users not knowing in advance what they want from the future system (Olphert & Damodaran, 2002)
M. Maguire and N. Bevan
rapid development cycles, reducing the time available for user needs analysis • representing user requirements in an appropriate form. This paper considers how these problems can be addressed by selecting appropriate methods to support the process of user requirements generation and validation. It describes each method briefly and shows how it contributes to the requirements process. The basis for the application of different user requirements methods is a simple process as shown in Figure 1 below encompassing 4 elements:
User needs identification
Envisioning and evaluation
Figure 1: General process for user requirements analysis
The four stages, and methods used to support the stages, are described in the next sections, followed by a summary table highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each technique.
The first step in user requirements analysis is to gather background information about the users and stakeholders and the processes that currently take place. The following methods may be adopted: Stakeholder analysis identifies all the users and stakeholders who may influence or be impacted by the system. This helps ensure that the needs of all those involved are taken into account. If required, the system is tested by them. User groups may include end users, supervisors, installers, and maintainers. Other stakeholders include recipients of output from the system, marketing staff, purchasers and support staff (Taylor, 1990). Stakeholder analysis identifies, for each user and stakeholder group, their main roles, responsibilities and task goals in relation to the system. One of the main issues is how to trade-off the competing needs of different stakeholder groups in the new system (see 4.5 Allocation of function and user cost-benefit analysis).
User requirements analysis
Secondary market research involves researching published sources such as research reports, census data, demographic information, that throw light upon the...
References: Andriole, S. J. (1989), Storyboard prototyping: a new approach to user requirements analysis, QED Information Sciences, Inc. Bevan N (2001) International Standards for HCI and Usability. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55, 4. Bevan, N, Bogomolni, I, & Ryan, N (2000) Cost-effective user centred design, www.usability.serco.com/trump Bevan, N. & Macleod, M (1994) Usability measurement in context. Behaviour and Information Technology, 13, 132-145 Beyer, H. & Holtzblatt, K. (1998), Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Bruseberg, A. & McDonagh-Philp, D. (2001), New product development by eliciting user experience and aspirations, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55(4), 435-452. Checkland, P. (1981), Systems thinking, systems practice, Wiley. Cooper, A. (1999), The inmates are running the asylum: why high tech products drive us crazy and how to restore the sanity, Sams publishing. Eason, K.D. (1988), Information technology and organisational change, Taylor and Francis. Ericsson Infocom Consultants AB and Linköping University (2001), The Delta method. www.deltamethod.net/ Hackos, J. & Redish, J. (1998), User and task analysis for interface design, Wiley. Hall, R.R. (2001), Prototyping for usability of new technology, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55, 4, 485-502. IBM (2002), EZSort http://www-3.ibm.com/ibm/easy/eou_ext.nsf/Publish/410 ISO (1997), ISO 9241: Ergonomics requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), 17parts, International Standards Organisation. ISO (1999), ISO 13407: Human-centred design processes for interactive systems, International Standards Organisation.
M. Maguire and N. Bevan
ISO (2002), ISO/IEC 9126-4: Software engineering – software product quality – Part 4: Quality in Use Metrics, International Standards Organisation. Kirwan, B. & Ainsworth, L.K. (eds.) (1992), A guide to task analysis, Taylor and Francis. Macaulay, L.A. (1996), Requirements engineering, Springer Verlag Series on Applied Computing. Maguire, M.C. (1998), User-centred requirements handbook. EC Telematics Applications Programme, Project TE 2010 RESPECT (Requirements Engineering and Specification in Telematics), WP4 Deliverable D4.2, version 3.3, May. http:www.lboro.ac.uk/research/husat/respect/rp2.html Maguire, M.C. (1999), NCR Knowledge Lab. Report on study of the management of domestic finances by family groups, 7 May, RSEHF (formerly HUSAT), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. Maguire, M.C. & Hirst, S.J. (2001a), Usability evaluation of the LINK project TIGS website and feedback on OVC specification. HUSAT Consultancy Limited, 2 March 2001. RSEHF (formerly HUSAT), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. Maguire, M.C. & Hirst, S.J. (2001b), Metropolitan Police Service redesign of corporate intranet pages. HUSAT Consultancy Limited, 26 March 2001. RSEHF (formerly HUSAT), Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. Maguire, M.C. (2001c), Context of use within usability activities, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55(4), 453-484. Mander, R. & Smith, B. (2002), Web usability for dummies, New York: Hungry Minds. Nielsen, J. (2000), Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity, New Riders Publishing. Nicolle, C. & Abascal, J. (eds.) (2001), Inclusive design guidelines for HCI, Taylor & Francis. Olphert, C.W. & Damodaran, L. (2002), Getting what you want, or wanting what you get? - beyond user centred design, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Design and Emotion, Loughborough, UK, 1-3 July 2002. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Benyon, D., Holland, S. & Carey, T. (1994), Human-computer interaction. Addison-Wesley. Robertson, S. & Roberston, T. (1999), Mastering the requirements process, AddisonWesley and ACM Press. Taylor, B. (1990), The HUFIT planning, analysis and specification toolset, In D. Diaper, G. Cockton, D. Gilmore & B. Shackel, (eds.), Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT '90, 371-376. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document