Software product release planning through optimization and what-if analysis

Abstract

We present a mathematical formalization of release planning with a corresponding optimization tool that supports product and project managers during release planning. The tool is based on integer linear programming and assumes that an optimal set of requirements is the set with maximal projected revenue against available resources. The input for the optimization is twofold. The first type of input data concerns the list of candidate requirements, estimated revenues, and resources needed. Second, managerial steering mechanisms enable what-if analysis in the optimization environment. Experiments based on real-life data made a sound case for the applicability of our approach.

Incremental Method Engineering for Process Improvement - A Case Study

“…Implemented capabilities Binary Priority List [14] A B WinWin requirements negotiation model [15] A B C Integer linear programming approach [16] A B C D E Requirements Triage [17] A B C E MOSCOW [18] A B C D Cost Value Approach [19] A B C D Quality Function Deployment [20] A B C Features Prioritization Matrix [21] A B C D E…”

“…Level E contains partner involvement, and its goal is to improve product quality and to increase involvement of external stakeholders in the product management process. Of the eight methods we analyzed in this research, three contain activities that implement maturity level E. These are Requirements Triage [17], Integer linear programming approach [16], and Features Prioritization Matrix [21]. Based on the situational factors of these three methods and those of the case company, we can now define which of these would suit the case company's method best (which key fits in the keyhole).…”

Uni-REPM: a framework for requirements engineering process assessment

“…-RQ1. 2 What practices can be extracted from existing techniques, tools, methods, and models for market-driven RE? -RQ1.…”

“…Moreover, in 19 of the 49 papers the findings can be generalised, and in a further 26 papers the findings can be partially generalised. One reason for the large number of partially generalisable results is that most of the studies use [5] Barney, Aurum, and Wohlin, "A product management challenge: Creating software product value through requirements selection" p38 [24] Fricker, Gorschek, and Glinz, "Goal-oriented requirements communication in new product development" p39 [2] Akker et al, "Software Product Release Planning through Optimization and What-If Analysis" p40 [33] Herrmann and Daneva, "Requirements prioritization based on benefit and cost prediction: An agenda for future research" p41 [60] Mohamed and Wahba, "Value estimation for software product management" p42 [70] Regnell, Berntsson-Svensson, and Olsson, "Supporting Road-Mapping of Quality Requirements" p43 [8] Berntsson Svensson, Gorschek, and Regnell, "Quality requirements in practice: An interview study in requirements engineering for embedded systems" p44 [86] Wilby, "Roadmap transformation: from obstacle to catalyst" p45 [ Can the findings of the study be generalised?…”

Comparing the performance of metaheuristics for the analysis of multi-stakeholder tradeoffs in requirements optimisation

“…Van den Akker et al [37,38] developed an optimisation tool based on integer linear programming, integrating the requirements selection and scheduling for the release planning to find the optimal set of requirements with the maximum revenue against budgetary constraints.…”