Page 305 -
P. 305

276           PART THREE  CONVENTIONAL METHODS FOR SOFTWARE ENGINEERING


                       formal position papers, documents, and question and answer sessions. History has
                       shown that this approach doesn't work very well. Misunderstandings abound, impor-
                       tant information is omitted, and a successful working relationship is never estab-
                       lished.
         WebRef           It is with these problems in mind that a number of independent investigators have
         One approach to FAST is  developed a team-oriented approach to requirements gathering that is applied dur-
         called “joint application  ing early stages of analysis and specification. Called facilitated application specifica-
         design” (JAD). A detailed
         discussion of JAD can be  tion techniques (FAST), this approach encourages the creation of a joint team of
         found at      customers and developers who work together to identify the problem, propose ele-
         www.bee.net/  ments of the solution, negotiate different approaches and specify a preliminary set
         bluebird/jaddoc.htm
                       of solution requirements [ZAH90]. FAST has been used predominantly by the infor-
                       mation systems community, but the technique offers potential for improved com-
                       munication in applications of all kinds.
                                                                          2
                          Many different approaches to FAST have been proposed. Each makes use of a
                       slightly different scenario, but all apply some variation on the following basic guide-
                       lines:

         ?  What makes   •  A meeting is conducted at a neutral site and attended by both software engi-
            a FAST
                            neers and customers.
         meeting different
         from an ordinary  •  Rules for preparation and participation are established.
         meeting?        •  An agenda is suggested that is formal enough to cover all important points
                            but informal enough to encourage the free flow of ideas.
                         •  A "facilitator" (can be a customer, a developer, or an outsider) controls the
                            meeting.
                         •  A "definition mechanism" (can be work sheets, flip charts, or wall stickers or
                            an electronic bulletin board, chat room or virtual forum) is used.
                         •  The goal is to identify the problem, propose elements of the solution, negoti-
                            ate different approaches, and specify a preliminary set of solution require-
                            ments in an atmosphere that is conducive to the accomplishment of the goal.
                       To better understand the flow of events as they occur in a typical FAST meeting, we
                       present a brief scenario that outlines the sequence of events that lead up to the meet-
         “Facts do not cease  ing, occur during the meeting, and follow the meeting.
          to exist because
          they are ignored.”  Initial meetings between the developer and customer (Section 11.2.1) occur and
          Aldous Huxley   basic questions and answers help to establish the scope of the problem and the over-
                       all perception of a solution. Out of these initial meetings, the developer and customer
                       write a one- or two-page "product request." A meeting place, time, and date for FAST
                       are selected and a facilitator is chosen. Attendees from both the development and
                       customer/user organizations are invited to attend. The product request is distributed
                       to all attendees before the meeting date.

                       2  Two of the more popular approaches to FAST are joint application development (JAD), developed
                          by IBM and the METHOD, developed by  Performance Resources, Inc., Falls Church, VA.
   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310