Providing quality requirements in Software Engineering is vital to ensure the product developed is able to deploy and function to meet the operational objectives. Software Requirement Engineering is the most complex process because it involves the integration of human, logics and process. Extracting or capturing what customers need and want is called Requirement Elicitation (RE) and it is the most crucial process in requirement engineering. If handled poorly, the cost of the failures would be very expensive. Most of the software projects that failed were due to poor requirements which occurred at RE phase. Thus, enhancing and optimizing the RE methods have been subject to a long research debate to ensure quality requirements are captured. Recently, Lean Six Sigma (LSS) had emerged as part of a continuous improvement in Software Development Life Cycles (SDLC). LSS is known for a systematic and structure business improvement successfully deployed in many fields of industry that contributes a significant gain not only in quality of products and services but also in operational costs and delivery. The objective of the research is to develop an integrated conceptual framework of LSS principles with Software Requirement Engineering methodology to optimize RE process. The article will produce conceptual framework as the comprehensive guidelines to capture quality software requirements.

No abstract

Requirement Elicitation is one of the challenging phases in the entire software development life cycle. It is the process of extracting and analyzing the requirements from customers to understand thoroughly of what system needs to be built. Despite all the advances in methodologies and practice approaches, extracting and establishing the right requirements are still part of the research debate. The objective of this paper is to compare the characteristics of two hybrid development approaches; Lean Six Sigma vs. Lean Agile. Most of the comparative studies done by most of the research compared within its relative knowledge such as; Lean vs. Six Sigma, Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control vs. Design-For-Six-Sigma or Lean vs. Six Sigma vs Lean Six Sigma. Whereas in software industries, the comparative studies were focused on Lean vs. Agile, Agile vs. Waterfall, Lean vs. Kanban vs.Agile, which compared the project size, process cycle time, sequential or iterative process. The following parts of the study is to explore the differences and similarities in principles and practices. The study contributes significantly to the business analysts to systematically address the solutions and actions to ensure continuous improvement in producing quality software requirement.

No abstract

No abstract