Retrospective based on data-driven persona significance in B-to-B software development

ABSTRACT

A Business-to-Business (B-to-B) software development company develops services to satisfy their customers' requirements. Developers should prioritize customer satisfaction because customers greatly influence on agile software development. However, it is possible that a B-to-B software development company has following issues: 1) failure to understand actual users because the requirements are not often derived from actual users and 2) failure to satisfy the future customers' requirements when only satisfying current customers. Although many previous works proposed methods to elicit the requirements based on actual quantitative data, these works had not considered customers and end-users simultaneously. Herein we proposed Retrospective based on Data-Driven Persona Significance (ReD2PS) to help developers to plan future releases. ReD2PS includes Persona Significance Index (PerSil) to reflect the correspondence between target users, which developers assume based on requirements in releases, and end-users' personas. A case study involving a Japanese cloud application shows that PerSil reflects the relationship between target users and end-users to discuss about the validity and effectiveness of ReD2PS.

References

1. M. Aoyama. 2007. Persona-Scenario-Goal Methodology for User-Centered Requirements Engineering. In Proceedings of RE 2007. 185--194.
2. C. Uchida et al. 2016. GO-MUC: A Strategy Design Method Considering Requirements of User and Business by Goal-Oriented Measurement. In Proceedings of CHASE 2016. ACM, 93--96.
3. D. Ameller et al. 2016. A Survey on Software Release Planning Models. In Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. Springer International Publishing, 48--65.
4. J. Cleland-Huang et al. 2013. A Persona-based Approach for Exploring Architecturally Significant Requirements in Agile Projects. In Proceedings of REFSQ '13. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 18--33.
5. K. Rönkkö et al. 2004. Personas is Not Applicable: Local Remedies Interpreted in a Wider Context. In Proceedings of PDC 04. ACM, 112--120.
6. L. Lehtola et al. 2009. Linking business and requirements engineering: Is solution planning a missing activity in software product companies? Requirements Engineering 14, 2 (2009), 113--128.
7. P. Achimugu et al. 2014. A systematic literature review of software requirements prioritization research. Information and Software Technology 56, 6 (2014), 568--585.
8. T. Matthews et al. 2012. How Do Designers and User Experience Professionals Actually Perceive and Use Personas?. In Proceedings of CHI '12. ACM, 1219--1228.
9. W. Maalej et al. 2016. Toward Data-Driven Requirements Engineering. IEEE Software 33, 1 (2016), 48--54.
10. X. Zhang et al. 2016. Data-driven Personas: Constructing Archetypal Users with Clickstreams and User Telemetry. In Proceedings of CHI '16. ACM, 5350--5359.
11. Y. Watanabe et al. 2017. ID3P: Iterative Data-driven Development of Persona Based on Quantitative Evaluation and Revision. In Proceedings of CHASE 2017. IEEE, 49--55.
12. E. Friess. 2012. Personas and decision making in the design process. In Proceedings of CHI '12. ACM, 1209.
13. J. Pruitt and J. Grudin. 2003. Personas: Practice and Theory. In Proceedings of DUX '03. ACM, 1.
14. M. Rahimi and J. Cleland-Huang. 2014. Personas in the Middle: Automated Support for Creating Personas As Focal Points in Feature Gathering Forums. In Proceedings of ASE '14. ACM, 479--484.
15. O. Rissanen and J. Münch. 2015. Transitioning Towards Continuous Delivery in the B2B Domain: A Case Study. In Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, Casper et al. Lassenius (Ed.). Springer International Publishing, 154--165.