IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v13y2010i1p1-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Obstacles to the flow of requirements verification

Author

Listed:
  • Alan B. Marchant

Abstract

The process of developing technical requirements and subsequently documenting adherence to those requirements is a primary task for Systems Engineering. Disciplined validation and verification of requirements helps assure that the product system will be successful as designed and gives the program a fighting chance to achieve its goals. But commitment and adherence to a process of thorough validation and verification is not always sufficient. Unforeseen technical constraints and logical inconsistencies often spring up at the last minute to block requirements verification for complex systems. By recognizing weaknesses in the structure and definition of requirements that are likely to interfere with the verification flow, the systems engineer can create a more manageable hierarchy of requirements and more effectively redirect the verification process when difficulties arise. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng

Suggested Citation

  • Alan B. Marchant, 2010. "Obstacles to the flow of requirements verification," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:13:y:2010:i:1:p:1-13
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20127
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20127?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Satoshi Nagano, 2008. "Space systems verification program and management process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 27-38, March.
    2. A. Terry Bahill & Steven J. Henderson, 2005. "Requirements development, verification, and validation exhibited in famous failures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14.
    3. Edouard Kujawski, 2002. "Why projects often fail, even with high cost‐contingencies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 151-155.
    4. Robert F. Larsen & Dennis M. Buede, 2002. "Theoretical framework for the continuous early validation (CEaVa) method," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 223-241.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brian M. Kennedy & Durward K. Sobek & Michael N. Kennedy, 2014. "Reducing Rework by Applying Set‐Based Practices Early in the Systems Engineering Process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 278-296, September.
    2. Robin de Graaf & Hans Voordijk & Len van den Heuvel, 2016. "Implementing Systems Engineering in Civil Engineering Consulting Firm: An Evaluation," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 44-58, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alejandro Salado & Roshanak Nilchiani, 2014. "A Categorization Model of Requirements Based on Max‐Neef's Model of Human Needs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 348-360, September.
    2. Alejandro Salado & Roshanak Nilchiani, 2015. "Adaptive Requirements Prioritization (ARP): Improving Decisions between Conflicting Requirements," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 472-490, October.
    3. Arekhandia Patrick Eigbe & Brian J. Sauser & John Boardman, 2010. "Soft systems analysis of the unification of test and evaluation and program management: A study of a Federal Aviation Administration's strategy," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 298-310, September.
    4. Michael W. Grenn & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2014. "The Requirements Entropy Framework in Systems Engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 462-478, December.
    5. Rick Botta & Zach Bahill & Terry Bahill, 2006. "When are observable states necessary?," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 228-240, September.
    6. Edouard Kujawski, 2002. "Selection of technical risk responses for efficient contingencies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 194-212.
    7. Nathan J. Slegers & Ronald T. Kadish & Gary E. Payton & John Thomas & Michael D. Griffin & Dan Dumbacher, 2012. "Learning from failure in systems engineering: A panel discussion," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 74-82, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:13:y:2010:i:1:p:1-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.