Engineering

  • 1.  Encouraging Users to Follow Best Practices

    IBM Select
    Posted Tue March 20, 2018 07:35 AM

    How are you getting your users to follow best practices when they aren’t enforceable through the DOORS Next Generation tool?



  • 2.  RE: Encouraging Users to Follow Best Practices

    Posted Wed March 21, 2018 08:59 AM

    Well,

    It is depends,

    In my territory, customers just use DOORS (both flavors) if they need to certify something and this certification process require Requirements Management and Requirements Development. Otherwise they don't use.

    Why? Is simple. Cost. We know that Requirements is foundation for all development process but, this require cost (process + tools + people) they usually like to use a very small approach for requirements justifying themselves that "Oh, We have a enough requirements. If we need to change we will change" But to have people in the way of requirements process. To then, is to much.

    My approach to then is that: "How much cost to you don't have requirements development and managements" and let's tell the history and try to identify if users have similar history.

    That is it. Hard but make part of our daily routine

    Let's do Requirements.

     

    Expedito Junior (Speed)
    IoT Specialist
    email: epjunior@br.ibm.com



  • 3.  RE: Encouraging Users to Follow Best Practices

    Posted Thu March 22, 2018 06:41 AM

    Amie - can you provide some examples of the best practices you have in mind, and how you would like them to be enforced?



  • 4.  RE: Encouraging Users to Follow Best Practices

    IBM Select
    Posted Fri March 23, 2018 04:51 AM

    Examples include:

    1. Not changing your configuration context with the folder hierarchy visible 
    2. Not canceling out of comparisons when delivering change sets 
    3. Working in the tool instead of trying to round trip requirements from external tools like Word 
    4. Not authoring in a stream that you shouldn't author in. 
    5. Linking requirements to test cases through modules rather than to base artifacts. 

    For the first two items in the list above, I'd like the bugs fixed so that we can do this without affecting performance and/or causing the need for frequent server restarts.

    For the third item, I'd the feature to either be removed or for it to work without grinding DNG to a halt.

    For the fourth item, it seems like you should be able to assign streams to teams. 

    For the fifth item, linking from requirements to RQM test cases in a module works well. However, when you link from RQM to DNG the link is created to the base artifact by default. I would like the default either configurable by admins or as being through the module.

    For all cases, we've tried training, one-on-one coaching, reminder emails. We have to restart the server two or three times each week due to some of the bugs, which we were told by IBM that we have to live with. Does anyone have any innovative ideas for getting best practices through to and practiced by a user community?



  • 5.  RE: Encouraging Users to Follow Best Practices

    User Group Leader
    Posted Wed August 01, 2018 08:54 AM
    Hi,

    I think most organisations have these struggles. I've done training and/or consulting at many CLM customers and it's usually a struggle. Here are thoughts on two points, in case they help. I'm happy to brainstorm sometime.

    3. Working in the tool instead of trying to round trip requirements from external tools like Word 

    Traceability is difficult with round-trip, so the more traceability is used in the tool (a key reason for using it!) then it becomes more of a hassle to round-trip. But positive things work better, like giving users quality customized module views and views focused on traceability.

    Also, I find it helps to have short weekly meetings (whether doing agile or not) and always display the live system during the meeting. Status updates are live, questions are addressed live and actions decided in the meeting are put (as much as possible) directly in the live system (like work items in RTC). This has a few effects
    (1) it makes the system integral in the work
    (2) one version of the truth
    (3) anyone doing round-trip probably won't have their latest data on the live system each meeting and will start to look unprofessional (politically correct word for stupid?) during the meetings. They quickly change their work practices.


    5. Linking requirements to test cases through modules rather than to base artifacts

    At one customer where I developed RPE (Rational Publishing Engine) templates, I added such an automated check into the template. So whenever reports are made, a built-in check makes sure all links in the module are to requirements/artifacts in modules, and not to base artifacts. Otherwise they get marked in RED in the document with a big WARNING: not in a module.

    The check would be run without the reporting part, but the report was the goal and so it was done as a value-add into the template. It didn't prevent it, but made it quickly visible so the cases were kept low. And people don't like to get RED stuff show up in their reports.

    John

    ------------------------------
    John Straathof
    Senior Trainer/Consultant, IBM CLM Products
    ------------------------------