Since IT systems are used to support business strategies of an organisation, strategic business requirements therefore are the motivation of the majority the requirements engineering approaches. But current requirements engineering approaches do not capture strategic business requirements but rather focus on functional and non-functional types of requirements. In this exploratory study two groups of business analysts explored requirements from a business scenario where different stakeholder views were given. A number of views represented the viewpoints of top management and the other views represented the viewpoints of operational level staff of the organisation. The collected data showed that the requirements captured from top management are different from the requirements captured from operational level staff in a way that strategic business requirements refer to the future direction of the organisation, however the requirements captured from operational level staff are about functionality and constraints of the system. The results indicate that strategic business requirements are associated to the top management and to capture them, business analysts have to pursue top management of the organsation.

Several frameworks have been proposed in Requirements Engineering (RE) discipline that use goal-oriented approach to model the concept of strategic alignment. Understanding the concept of strategic alignment from the perspective of Management Information Systems (MIS) discipline and evaluating goal-oriented approaches in the context of strategic alignment appear to be the fundamental weakness in the RE frameworks that claim to model strategic alignment. In this research we developed a list of constructs by analysing the concept of strategic alignment embedded in strategy map which is one of the widely used frameworks to develop strategic alignment in MIS discipline. In this regard we analysed details of a case study conducted to develop strategic alignment. Against the identified list of constructs we evaluated five well-known goal-oriented approaches and presented their level of effectiveness to model the concept of strategic alignment.

Software becomes ever more feature-rich and thereby harder to distinguish based on its functionality. Instead, quality is starting to differentiate between similar software products. Specifying, constructing, and assuring quality has been under research for several decades and continues to be a long- term research area because of its many facets and its com- plexity. Current national and international initiatives show that there is an active research community in academia and industry. This workshop builds on the rich experiences of a series of previous workshops and aims to bring this community together to discuss current issues and future developments.

Cost, schedule and quality are highly correlated factors in software development. They basically form three sides of the same triangle. Beyond a certain point (the "Quality is Free" point), it is difficult to increase the quality without increasing either cost or schedule or both for the software under development. As products and applications mature, users expect higher quality products. They want IT organizations to be responsible and accountable for the quality claims made by the product marketing teams. In the last couple decades, much software engineering research has focussed on standards, methodologies and techniques for improving software quality, measuring software quality and software quality assurance. Most of this research is focused on the internal/development view of quality. More recent studies done in conjunction with the marketing groups have made attempts to understand the customer view of quality. All of these different ongoing activities to understand quality from the various perspectives have made the field even more enriching and exciting. The Fourth Workshop on Software Quality aims to bring together academic, industrial and commercial communities interested in software quality topics to discuss the different technologies being defined and used in the software quality area.

To develop software on time and within budget is not good enough if the software produced is full of defects. As the software market matures, users want to be assured of quality. They no longer accept claims made by the IT department at face value, but expect concrete demonstrations of quality. Software stakeholders are also demanding higher quality software than ever before. In recent years, much software engineering research has focussed on standards, methodologies and techniques for improving software quality, measuring software quality and software quality assurance. Most of this research is focused on an internal view of quality whereas few measures of the customer view of quality exist. The Third Workshop on Software Quality aims to bring together academic, industrial and commercial communities interested in software quality topics to discuss the different technologies being defined and used in the software quality area.

In the original theory of group performance in software development technical reviews there was no consideration given to the influence of the inspection process, inspection performance, or the inspected artifact, on the structure of the theoretical model. We present an extended theoretical model, along with discussion and justification for components of the new model. These extensions include consideration of the software product quality attributes, the prescriptive processes now developed for reviews, and a more detailed consideration of the technical and nontechnical characteristics of the inspectors. We present both the structure of the model and the nature of the interactions between elements in the model. Consideration is also given to the opportunity for increased formalism in the technical review process. We show that opportunity exists to both improve industrial practice and extend research-based knowledge of the technical review process and context.