The number of papers and articles on goals would suggest that goal-oriented requirements engineering is a well understood and mature area within the requirements engineering discipline. In particular, there is a wealth of published material on formal goal modelling approaches. However, the uptake of the goal approaches advocated by academics and researchers within real world settings appears to be quite low. Where goals are used in industrial practice their use is mainly informal and the methods used are inconsistent. There appears to be a significant gap between research and practice in the use of goals within requirements engineering. A two-part study was undertaken to check whether there is evidence to support this view of a disconnection between research and industry. Firstly, a literature survey of requirements engineering papers about goals reveals a large body of published material, but the majority has little industrial involvement. Secondly, a questionnaire completed by experienced requirements engineering practitioners suggests that use of goals in practice is inconsistent, informal, and rarely utilises formal modelling approaches. This paper proposes future work that would close the gap between research and practice in the use of goals within requirements engineering.

Non-functional requirements (NFRs) are commonly distinguished from functional requirements by differentiating how the system shall do something in contrast to what the system shall do. This distinction is not only prevalent in research, but also influences how requirements are handled in practice. NFRs are usually documented separately from functional requirements, without quantitative measures, and with relatively vague descriptions. As a result, they remain difficult to analyze and test. Several authors argue, however, that many so-called NFRs actually describe behavioral properties and may be treated the same way as functional requirements. In this paper, we empirically investigate this point of view and aim to increase our understanding on the nature of NFRs addressing system properties. We report on the classification of 530 NFRs extracted from 11 industrial requirements specifications and analyze to which extent these NFRs describe system behavior. Our results suggest that most "non-functional" requirements are not non-functional as they describe behavior of a system. Consequently, we argue that many so-called NFRs can be handled similarly to functional requirements.

Performance requirements play an important role in software development. They describe system behavior that directly impacts the user experience. Specifying performance requirements in a way that all necessary content is contained, i.e., the completeness of the individual requirements, is challenging, yet project critical. Furthermore, it is still an open question, what content is necessary to make a performance requirement complete. To address this problem, we introduce a framework for specifying performance requirements. This framework (i) consists of a unified model derived from existing performance classifications, (ii) denotes completeness through a content model, and (iii) is operationalized through sentence patterns. We evaluate both the applicability of the framework as well as its ability uncover incompleteness with performance requirements taken from 11 industrial specifications. In our study, we were able to specify 86% of the examined performance requirements by means of our framework. Furthermore, we show that 68% of the specified performance requirements are incomplete with respect to our notion of completeness. We argue that our framework provides an actionable definition of completeness for performance requirements.

Context: Seamless model-based development provides integrated chains of models, covering all software engineering phases. Non-functional requirements (NFRs), like reusability, further play a vital role in software and systems engineering, but are often neglected in research and practice. It is still unclear how to integrate NFRs in a seamless model-based development. Goal: Our long-term goal is to develop a theory on the specification of NFRs such that they can be integrated in seamless model-based development. Method: Our overall study design includes a multi-staged procedure to infer an empirically founded theory on specifying NFRs to support seamless modeling. In this short paper, we present the study design and provide a discussion of (i) preliminary results obtained from a sample, and (ii) current issues related to the design. Results: Our study already shows significant fields of improvement, e.g., the low agreement during the classification. However, the results indicate to interesting points; for example, many of commonly used NFR classes concern system modeling concepts in a way that shows how blurry the borders between functional and NFRs are. Conclusions: We conclude so far that our overall study design seems suitable to obtain the envisioned theory in the long run, but we could also show current issues that are worth discussing within the empirical software engineering community. The main goal of this contribution is not to present and discuss current results only, but to foster discussions on the issues related to the integration of NFRs in seamless modeling in general and, in particular, discussions on open methodological issues.

[Background] Requirements Engineering is crucial for project success, and to this end, many measures for quality assurance of the software requirements specification (SRS) have been proposed. [Goal] However, we still need an empirical understanding on the extent to which SRS are created and used in practice, as well as the degree to which the quality of an SRS matters to subsequent development activities. [Method] We studied the relevance of SRS by relying on survey research and explored the impact of quality defects in SRS by relying on a controlled experiment. [Results] Our results suggest that the relevance of SRS quality depends both on particular project characteristics and what is considered as a quality defect; for instance, the domain of safety critical systems seems to motivate for an intense usage of SRS as a means for communication whereas defects hampering the pragmatic quality do not seem to be relevant as initially thought. [Conclusion] Efficient and effective quality assurance measures must be specific for carefully characterized contexts and carefully select defect classes.

Context: In the context of the research and development project ARAMiS, multiple partners from research and industry are collaborating in the development of new methods and technologies in the field of multicore systems. Goal: We designed and executed studies for evaluating the results of the ARAMiS sub-project responsible for requirements engineering: an artifact-based requirements engineering approach, its tooling, and a cross-domain scenario. Method: This evaluation was performed along with the dissemination of the results in the project. The evaluation included two studies aimed at collecting the opinions of the project participants regarding the requirements engineering results from the viewpoints of industry and research. Results: The mainly positive results showed us that the different parts of the requirements engineering approach in this project are being accepted. Conclusions: Nonetheless, especially the results for the scenario revealed some weaknesses, such as the so-called "ARAMiS gap", i.e., a gap between the high-level requirements engineering artifacts and the detailed engineering artifacts.

Artefact-based requirements engineering (RE) describes the idea of establishing a company-wide RE reference model by putting the focus on the RE artefacts and their dependencies rather than dictating a strict process with interconnected methods. Previously conducted case studies already strengthen our confidence in certain advantages and shortcomings of the paradigm. Still, our case studies by now remain isolated focussing on particular socio-economic contexts and, thus, the findings can hardly be generalised. Therefore, we need further replications. In this paper, we contribute the design of a replication case study to better understand the impact of artefact-based requirements engineering and, as a long term goal, strengthen an initial theory of expectation we could already infer from results and experiences we made in previous case studies. The replications shall lead to a reliable empirical base due to comparability among the studies. This allows for a (still restricted) generalisability of conclusions on artefact-based requirements engineering.