Activity:
|
Purpose
|
Role: System Analyst |
Frequency: As required, typically once per iteration in Inception and Elaboration, and revisited as needed in subsequent phases. |
Steps
|
Input Artifacts:
| Resulting Artifacts:
|
Tool Mentors: |
Workflow Details: |
One of the simplest ways to gain agreement on the definition of the problem, is to write it down and see if everyone agrees.
Ask the group: What is the problem?
Then ask the group again: What is the problem, really?
Don't accept the first statement of a problem. Continue to ask "why?" to find out what the problem "really" is.
Sometimes the group can be so focused on an envisioned solution that it is
hard to get them to formulate what the underlying problem actually is. In such
cases, it can be beneficial to explore the benefits of the solution, and then
try to find the problems being solved by those benefits. You can then explore
whether or not those problems are "real" problems in the organization.
Common techniques used to find the problem behind the problem are
brainstorming fishbone diagrams Pareto
diagrams
Depending on the domain expertise of the development team, identifying the stakeholders may be a trivial or a nontrivial step. Often, this simply involves interviewing decision-makers, potential users and other interested parties. The following questions are helpful:
Start to develop profiles of potential (or actual) users of the system. These will map to the roles of the human actors of the system being developed. Initial information on key users and their environment should be documented in the Vision document.
The system boundary defines the border between the solution and the real world that surrounds the solution. In other words, the system boundary describes an envelope in which the solution system is contained. Information, in the form of inputs and outputs, is passed back and forth from the system to the users that live outside of the system. All interactions with the system occur via interfaces between the system and the external world.
In many cases, the boundaries of the system are obvious. For example, the boundaries of a single user, shrink-wrap personal contact manager that runs on Microsoft Windows® are relatively well defined. There is only one user and one platform. The interfaces between the user and the application consist of the user interface dialogs that the user accesses to enter information into the system, and any output reports and communication paths that the system uses to document or transmit the resulting information.
It is usually very effective to use actors to define and describe the boundaries of the system. See Activity: Find Actors and Use Cases.
There are a variety of sources of constraints to be considered. Much of this information may be documented in the Supplementary Sepcification artifact. Following is a list of potential sources and questions to ask:
The information gathered here will be the initial input to the design constraints defined in the Supplementary Specifications.
With the whole group, work on easel charts and fill in the following template for each problem you have identified:
The problem of <describe the problem>
affects <the stakeholders affected by the problem>.
The impact of which is <what is the impact of the problem>.
A successful solution would <list some key benefits of a successful
solution>.
The purpose of this template is to help you distinguish solutions/answers from problems/questions.
The problem of: untimely and improper resolution of
customer service issues
affects: our customers, customer support reps and service technicians.
The impact of which is: customer dissatisfaction, perceived lack of
quality, unhappy employees and loss of revenue.
A successful solution would: provide real-time access to a trouble-shooting
database by support reps and facilitate dispatch of service technicians, in a
timely manner, only to those locations which genuinely need their assistance.
Based on the benefits listed in your problem statements, develop a list of features you want in the system. Describe them briefly, and give them attributes to help define their general state and priority in the project .
You should check the Vision at this stage to verify that your work is on track, but not review it in detail. Consider the checkpoints for the Vision document in Activity: Review Requirements.
Rational Unified Process
|