NAMIC Requirements
Pilot Report
Why do projects fail?
“The number one contributor to project success is
“Opinions
“Lack
of user
about
involvement
why
projects
traditionally
are impaired
and
been of
user involvement.
Not
surprisingly,
thehas
absence
ultimately
the
canceled
one reason
for incomplete
project
usernumber
involvement
isranked
a major
causefailure.
of project failure.
requirements
Conversely,
theand
number
lack
one
user
contributor
to project
the
Even when delivered
on of
time
andinvolvement
on budget,
aatproject
top
success
beennot
user
involvement.”
can of
failthe
ifhas
itlist.”
does
meet
users’ needs.”
– Standish
Group,
Chaos
Extreme
Report,
Chaos,
2001 1999
– Standish
Group,
Chaos:
A Recipe
for1994
Success,
What should we do?
very knowledgeable scientist
very agile engineer
Retrieving
What
do you
a
need towill
pebble
increase
not
your knowledge?
challenge
me.
engineer
wants
to be challenged
challenge:
Low
A pebble.
scientist
wantsscience:
to acquire
knowledge
Medium
I will bring you
the head of a
samurai instead.
engineer
challenge: High
I have no use for the
head of a samurai.
Your effort and skill
will be wasted.
scientist
science: Low
Yes, that would
challenge me.
Can you bring me
an eagle feather?
Requirements
negotiation
条件交渉
engineer
challenge: High
scientist
science: High
This is a perilous
mission. How will
others know that
you sent me?
This will also serve as a
“I
seek the
eagle
that others
your
Ireminder
This
will
way
give
you a
feather.
This
willthe
mission is to
retrieve
quotation
will
know
that
to
take
I
eagle
feather
and not
to
increase
my
seek the
head of the
with
sent
you.
knowledge”
- 科学者
samurai.
Use Case
使用場合
Statement
engineer
scientist
I will consider my
mission a success if
I have grown as a
ninja.
I will consider your
mission a success if
I have the eagle
feather.
Concrete
勝利は調節する
Win Conditions
engineer
scientist
I have seen what
has happened here
and I am happy.
NIH
engineer
scientist
Steps to go Forward
NAMIC Pilot Method for
Agile Requirements Management
Project:
Project description
Use case:
Quotation with direct attribution.
The quotation should:
• describe the desired system behavior
• be written in the first-person (if possible)
• be written in the investigator’s language
• not contain any technical terms.
E.g.: “I’d like to do be able to go to an ATM and
withdraw cash.” – Jane Smith, Ph.D.
Impact:
Scientific impact rating from investigator
(Low/Medium/High)
Difficulty: Challenge rating from engineer
(Low/Medium/High)
NAMIC Pilot Method for
Agile Requirements Management
Vision:
Common vision of goal.
Goal:
Technical description of goal.
Team Members:
Team should be as small as absolutely
possible. Small is beautiful. <5.
Win Conditions:
Critical success factor and fundamental
motivation for each team member.
If a win condition is not met, the team
member will not consider the project a
success.
Be aware of latent/ unspoken win
conditions.
NAMIC Pilot Method for
Agile Requirements Management
Steps:
Concrete steps towards project completion
Process Review:
Aka: Team retrospective or postmortem.
Quantitative review. Was this project a
success? What worked what well? What
didn’t work well?
Revise process accordingly for next project.
Steps to go Forward
1. Algorithm Core reviews requirements pilot proposal at
next Algorithm TCON. Makes adjustments and votes
on ratification.
2. Engineering Core designs Project Template for Wiki.
3. Communicate Method to NAMIC-all
Steps to go Forward
Develop Talking Points tied to NIH Priority
Criteria
Top 5 NIH Priorities for NAMIC
Priority
Description
1. 2815
To what extent has the program blended the cultures of biology and computing … ?
2. 25 13
Have the Centers allowed other Universities with fewer resources to engage in or
accelerate research that would have been difficult before?
3. 24 11
Has the NCBC program achieved something that could not have happened through
traditional (IC-specific) NIH initiatives?
4. 22 14
Have the site’s tools made possible investigative activities that would have been
either extremely difficult or at least very time consuming before?
5. 21 9
Have the site’s tools catalyzed “new science” in the user community? Can anyone
point to something that, without the NCBCs, simply could not have happened?
Talking Points
1. How does this bring together biology and computing? (NIH 1)
2. How does this help smaller labs? (NIH 2)
3. How does this lead to New Science? (NIH 3-5)
NIH
engineer
scientist