Implementation of systematic requirements engineering in infrastructure projects

(1)

IN DEGREE PROJECT ,

SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS ,

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2017

Implementation of systematic

requirements engineering in

infrastructure projects

A case study at the Swedish Transportation

Administration

EBRU NUR ULUDAG

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(2)

(3)

Implementation of systematic requirements

engineering in infrastructure projects

A case study at the Swedish Transportation Administration

by

Ebru Nur Uludag

Master of Science Thesis INDEK 2017:83

KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

(4)

(5)

Implementering av systematisk

kravhantering inom infrastrukturprojekt

En fallstudie på Trafikverket

Ebru Nur Uludag

Examensarbete INDEK 2017:83

KTH Industriell teknik och management

(6)

(7)

Master of Science Thesis INDEK 2017:83

Implementation of systematic requirements

engineering in infrastructure projects: Case

study at the Swedish Transportation

Administration

Ebru Nur Uludag

Approved

2017-06-05

Examiner

Cali Nuur

Supervisor

Pär Blomkvist

Commissioner

The Swedish Transportation Administration

Contact person

Mikael Ringkvist

Abstract

Purpose: As a way of being more professional in procurements, a working process has been implemented in the infrastructure projects at the Swedish Transportation Administration. The working process is supposed to improve the requirements management and contribute with better requirements specification used in the procurements. However, there have been difficulties in the implementation and this study investigates the existing barriers in the organization contributing to the obstacles. The purpose of this study is to investigate the barriers occurring when implementing requirements engineering to infrastructure projects.

Method: This single case study was designed as a four step process which started with 1.Planning and an introductory literature review, 2. Making the case study by switching between empirical data collection (by document gathering, observations and interviews) and theory, 3. Developing a theoretical framework and 4. Verifying conclusions. The interviews were held with relevant employees and representatives from planning, investment and maintenance department, as well as, suppliers.

Findings: The developed theoretical framework, along with frameworks for systems and requirements engineering, were a foundation for analysis of the empirical material. This study concludes that the main barriers having impact on the process were 1. The integration of the departments and suppliers, 2. Complexity in the requirements engineering process and 3. Other organizational factors such as IT, People and Management.

Contributions: The theoretical contribution of this thesis is factors and variables needed to be

considered when implementing requirements engineering in an organization. It also provides a theoretical framework for analyzing requirements engineering processes and systems engineering approaches. Furthermore, it provides a description of how the requirements engineering process can be applied in an organization, what barriers there are in the implementation and a discussion on how they can be

managed.

Key-words: Systems engineering, requirements engineering, process improvement

(8)

(9)

Examensarbete INDEK 2017:83

Implementering av systematisk kravhantering

inom infrastruktur projekt: Fallstudie i

Trafikverket

Ebru Nur Uludag

Godkänt

2017-06-05

Examinator

Cali Nuur

Handledare

Pär Blomkvist

Uppdragsgivare

Trafikverket

Kontaktperson

Mikael Ringkvist

Sammanfattning

Syfte: För att kunna ha en mer professionell roll i upphandlingar har en ny arbetsprocess implementerats i infrastrukturprojekten på Trafikverket. Syftet med arbetsprocessen är att kravhanteringen ska förbättras och bidra till bättre kravspecifikation som används före upphandlingar. Det har emellertid funnits

svårigheter med genomförandet och denna studie undersöker de befintliga hindren i organisationen som bidrar till dessa. Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka de hinder som uppstår vid implementering av systematisk kravhantering inom infrastrukturprojekt.

Metod: Denna fallstudie var utformad som en fyrastegsprocess som började med 1. Planering och inledande litteraturöversikt, 2. Utförande av fallstudien genom växling mellan empirisk datainsamling (genom dokumentinsamling, observationer och intervjuer) och teori, 3. Utveckling av ett teoretiskt ramverk och 4. Verifiering av slutsatserna. Intervjuerna hölls med relevanta medarbetare och representanter från planerings-, investerings- och underhållsavdelningen samt leverantörer till Trafikverket.

Resultat: Det utvecklade teoretiska ramverket, tillsammans med teorierna för system- och kravanalys, utgjorde grunden för analys av det empiriska materialet. De viktigaste identifierade hindren som påverkar processen var 1. Integration av avdelningar och leverantörer, 2. Komplexitet i kravhanteringsprocessen och 3. Övriga organisatoriska faktorer som IT, Människor och Management.

Teoretiska och praktiska bidrag: Det teoretiska bidraget från detta examensarbete är faktorer och variabler som behöver övervägas när man implementerar kravhantering i en organisation. Det bidrar även med ett teoretiskt ramverk för att analysera implementering av systematisk kravhantering. Dessutom bidrar studien med beskrivning av hur en kravhanteringsprocess kan tillämpas, vika barriärer det finns i tillämpningen och föreslår hur befintliga hinder i implementeringen hanteras.

Nyckelord: Systemteknik, kravanalys, kravhantering, process modell, V-modell, projekt,

(10)

(11)

Acknowledgement

This master thesis is a result of a work done for the Swedish Transportation Administration (STA) over the spring 2017 in the Industrial Engineering and Management programme at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH).

I am thankful to my thesis advisor Pär Blomkvist in the Sustainability and Industrial Dy-namics Department at KTH for his constant support throughout this thesis work and for allowing me to work independently by giving useful tips whenever there was a need. My seminar group’s input, through their feedback on my presented work, was also very helpful. I also want to present my gratitude to Mikael Ringkvist, my thesis advisor at the STA, whose input was equally helpful during my work. I would like to acknowledge the support from the employees at the STA who have helped me during my research.

I am thankful to Hilal Ayan, Gökce Tuba Masur and Helen Ghattas for reading this thesis and very pleased for their suggested corrections.

At last but not the least, my sincere gratitude is there for my family and friends who have motivated and encouraged me in every difficult challenge throughout my years of study. Furthermore, I am feeling privileged to have a father who gave me continuous support and inspiration in every way. This achievement would not have been possible without the im-mense love and care of my family.

(12)

(13)

Contents Contents

List of Figures

1 The degree to which SE is employed in resp. industry [Aslaksen and Merz,

2005] . . . 2

2 The organizational structure of the Swedish Transport Administration [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015] . . . 4

3 Need of systems thinking with increasing complexity [Ramakrishnan and Tes-tani, 2011] . . . 8

4 The RE system hierarchy [Watton, 2001] . . . 9

5 RE process in a diagram [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013] . . . 10

6 The requirements template developed by Rupp [2004] . . . 11

7 V-diagram: Systems engineering process for software development [Wiley, 2015] 12 8 The RE process iterative and spiral Sommerville [2010] . . . 13

9 Relevant theoretical themes of this thesis adapted from Kettinger et al. [1997] 16 10 Procurement process [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015] . . . 28

11 Life-cycle and responsibilities of every department . . . 31

12 Diagram used for analyzing the RE process in the STA[Wiegers and Beatty, 2013] . . . 39

13 The framework of the thesis adapted from Kettinger et al. [1997] . . . 51

14 Proposed requirements engineering process adapted from Watton [2001] . . . 61

(15)

Introduction

1 Introduction

The aim of this chapter is to introduce the reader to the research field. It begins with a short introduction of existing challenges in infrastructure projects and how they are addressed with systems engineering approaches. Then, a problem description of the investigated organiza-tion, the Swedish Transportation Administraorganiza-tion, will follow. Based on these, the purpose and research questions of this thesis are presented.

1.1 Background

The importance of having a well-functioning construction industry is beyond doubt due to its contribution to the economy of a country [Cheung et al., 2001]. However, even though construction projects highly affect the society, they are often under heavy criticism for in-efficient outcomes. It is common for them to have time and cost overruns, low productivity and poor quality as a result of increasing complexity and number of stakeholders [Yasamis et al., 2002]. In comparison to regular construction projects, infrastructure projects require even greater amount of planning, financial investments, engineering efforts and resources of different nature. Furthermore, their sustainability impacts span wider geographical areas and longer times [Matar et al., 2015]. They are often funded by multiple governmental agen-cies at different levels e.g. city, county etc. and many groups in the society are affected by them; from local communities to all systems within the geographical area [Uden, 2014]. The high-level complexity results the need of several shifts in responsibility during the project i.e. from the agencies to the contractors or suppliers. In other words, the design is initiated by one firm but completed by another, even though it is the same governmental agency being responsible of the overall project; from ideation and design, to producing, maintenance and retirement.

As a consequence of these handovers, the potential for misinterpretation or incomplete cor-poration of the requirements increases [Uden, 2014]. The existing codes and standards forming the requirements are often perceived as adding more layers of complexity to the infrastructure projects. Unlike other industries, infrastructure projects can cross into dif-ferent jurisdictions, such as regulations and legislation, leading to varying or conflicting requirements of the stakeholders. As a consequence of this complexity, the requirements specification used in procurement in a project grows exponentially and one of the main challenges within the civil engineering industry is having a well-functioning requirements management process. The exponentially growing complexity and requirements in the infras-tructure projects have increased the interest in systems engineering (SE) approaches [Graaf et al., 2016]. According to Wiley [2015], SE is often explained as the science about managing complex and complicated products. This implies that implementing a SE approach would benefit the management of the growing complexity in projects [Graaf et al., 2016].

1.1.1 The SE approach in infrastructure projects

(16)

Introduction

2005]. Kagioglou et al. [2001] explains that it is common for industries to introduce new methods and techniques used in other industries in order to shift traditional paradigms. There are several examples of how SE approaches have successfully been implemented in other industries. It has, for instance, been applied in the production of cars in the manu-facturing industry and in the development of chemicals in the process industry.

Figure 1: The degree to which SE is employed in resp. industry [Aslaksen and Merz, 2005]

The application of SE approaches to infrastructure projects lags behind in comparison to other industries, such as aerospace [Aslaksen and Merz, 2005]. However, the interest of implementing SE approaches on construction industry has in the last decade increased, especially in road and railway infrastructure projects [Graaf et al., 2016]. Even though SE approaches have not been implemented in the construction industry to a greater extent, there are a few exceptions with examples of successful projects. For instance, Haskins et al. [2006] describes the implementation of SE approaches in the production of the Öresund bridge, which joins Sweden and Denmark. The project began in the early 1990’s and emphasis was put on defining time, budget and quality constraints. The designing phase, ending with documentation of requirements and maintenance manuals, evolved over more than seven years. The project complexity was high, as it required both technical competence and stakeholder cooperation. The success factor within this project was that the project owners defined comprehensive requirements which resulted delivery of a high-quality bridge. 1.1.2 The SE approach and RE process

Implementing SE approaches contributes with explicitly considering all building blocks in the life-cycle of a project i.e. from identifying the need, to producing the right product, through operations and retirement. The process starts with determining scope and transforming user needs into requirements in order to design the system [Wiley, 2015]. The process of translating user needs and individual statements from stakeholders to requirements needed for designing systems is called requirements engineering (RE). The RE process results a requirements specification document, understood and agreed by all stakeholders and con-tractors [Distanont, 2013]. The RE process is often encompassed with a system level view and according to Stevens and Brook [1998], it is a branch of SE. The RE process is consisting of discovering the stakeholders and their needs, and documenting them in order to analyze, negotiate and validate the requirements [Nuseibeh and Easterbrook, 2000]. The verification and validation of the requirements characterizes the RE process which ensures that right product is built in right way [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013]. Nuseibeh and Easterbrook [2000] describes that a successful requirements specification depends on how well it fits the needs of the stakeholders in a system, which can only be made by having a good RE process. 1.1.3 The Swedish Transportation Administration

(17)

Introduction

(STA) has tried to implement the methods in their road and railway projects to struc-ture and manage their requirements.

The STA is a governmental agency in Sweden responsible for long-term infrastructure plan-ning for transportation of road, railway, maritime and aviation. Furthermore, they build, operate and maintain roads and railways in Sweden. The objective of the STA is to have an accessible and safe transportation system that takes the environment and people’s health into account [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015].

The STA is a relatively new organization from 2010 [The Swedish Transportation Adminis-tration, 2015]. The Swedish Road and Railway Administrations were integrated into a new organization, forming the present STA, responsible for long-term planning of the transport system. The differences in the project governance, made at the Swedish Road Administra-tion and the Swedish Railway AdministraAdministra-tion, can still be seen in the project governance of road and railway projects in the STA today.

The STA has five departments:

• Market and planning - planning for Sweden’s public infrastructure.

• Traffic management- directs and supervises the traffic on roads and railways and also delivers traffic information.

• Maintenance - managing, maintaining and developing the road and railway system as well as the technical systems that are included in these.

• Investments - procuring, implementing, and monitoring the majority of the larger reconstruction measures and new investments (projects with a budget of less than 4 billion SEK).

(18)

Introduction

Figure 2: The organizational structure of the Swedish Transport Administration [The Swedish Trans-portation Administration, 2015]

1.2 Problem description

Historically, the STA’s predecessors had the responsibility for the whole chain of planning and executing design, construction and maintenance. Just prior to the creation of the STA in its current form in 2010, the parts responsible for executing design and construction were corporatized which created the need to redefine and clarify the client-supplier relationship and its terms. In 2011, a change process was initiated within the organization towards having new role in the sector as a more professional refined client. The implication of this was that suppliers should have more degrees of freedom and responsibility in the design, construction and production phase of the projects. This has meant that new procurement methods was implemented and added, where new types of requirements were needed to be managed prior to procurement.

(19)

Introduction

perspective and using RE methods and tools. Many projects have not yet implemented the solution of systematic requirements management or get stuck within the process. The goal of the systematic requirements management is to make the vaguely formulated needs of the stakeholders into properly formulated and calculable requirements to the suppliers in the handover of the requirements specification produced prior to procurements.

1.3 Purpose and research questions

The aim of this study is to account for how engineering approaches and processes can help the Swedish Transportation Administration with their challenges related to requirements management. The purpose of the study is to investigate the challenges that arise with the implementation of SE approaches and RE processes, i.e. systematic requirements manage-ment, in infrastructure projects. The purpose is also to discuss possible methods to manage these barriers. In order to fulfill the purpose, the following research question is posed: RQ: Which barriers exist in the implementation of systematic requirements management in the STA and in which ways can the associated barriers be managed?

In order to answer the research question, these subquestions were answered: • How is the SE approach applied in the STA?

• How is the RE process implemented in the infrastructure projects? • How does other related subfactors affect the RE process in the STA?

1.4 Delimitations

The thesis is conducted in the governmental agency Swedish Transportation Administration and reviews the implementation of systematic requirements management in infrastructure projects. The thesis is focusing on how the organization has applied SE approaches and RE processes in order to create good requirements specification and thus provide better procurement environment. Within the study, the following delimitations have been made: The study is delimited to only consider the road and railway projects in the STA. Fur-thermore, the study is delimited to consider the planning, investment and maintenance departments since these departments have major role in the life-cycle of a road or rail-way. Due to time-limitations, the study only investigates investment projects and not major projects.

(20)

Introduction

1.5 Outline of the thesis

Chapter 1: In order to provide an understanding of the phenomenon of applying RE pro-cesses in the STA the introduction chapter presents the research field by describing existing challenges in infrastructure projects, how the challenges are addressed by SE approaches and the STA as the relevant case which gives a foundation for formulating the purpose and the research questions.

Chapter 2: This chapter describes the relevant theoretical frameworks needed in order to analyze how the RE process is implemented in the STA and presents subfactors affecting the process.

Chapter 3: The methodology chapter describes the methods that were used in order to fulfill the purpose of the thesis, which contains all the stages from empirical data collection to literature review. The chapter concludes with an evaluation of the quality of the study. Chapter 4: The organizational background chapter describes the different departments having a major role in the infrastructure projects and explains why a RE process was needed. Chapters 5, 6 and 7: These chapters present the empirical findings, along with ana-lyzing them, in order to discuss the identified barriers with a thematic approach. These themes were SE approach in project management, RE process and subfactors such as IT, people, and management affecting the process.

(21)

Literature review and theoretical framework

2 Literature review and theoretical framework

The aim of this chapter is to give the reader a foundation for understanding the context. It consists of the themes systems engineering (SE) approach, requirements engineering (RE) process and subfactors affecting the process.

As stated in the introduction chapter the aim of this study is to account for how engineering approaches and processes can help the Swedish Transportation Administration (STA) with their challenges related to requirements management. Accordingly, SE approaches and RE processes are the main themes of the theoretical framework. To reach the aim of the study other identified factors affecting the RE process have been synthesized with the theoretical themes into a framework, given in Figure 9.

2.1 SE approaches in infrastructure projects

As earlier mentioned, in the introduction chapter there have been attempts of applying SE approaches in infrastructure projects [Graaf et al., 2016]. The purpose of implementing systematic requirements management in the STA is not only having a systematic approach to the projects, but also to apply the RE process to manage their requirements. Graaf et al. [2016] describes that the challenges of implementing the approach is a consequence of the characteristic of the civil engineering and construction industry. The first described challenge is the influence the contractor, i.e. consultancy firms, has on the execution of the assignments so that they choose to make it in their own way. The second challenge is that, usually, the project is split into contractually separate segments i.e. different consultancy firms are responsible for different levels of the design phase. This often causes disjointedness in the project and in the implementation of the SE approach since an overview of the entire project in a life-cycle perspective gets lost. The third challenge, addressed by Graaf et al. [2016], is that the ending phase of the projects are too fast so that the project organization for each project is dismantled, which means that for each new project there will be costs of setting up SE approach. As a complement to the described challenges, Aslaksen and Merz [2005] has described the lack of implementing the SE approach in the industry as a result of the lack of knowledge of how the construction should be carried out in a cost-effective manner. The complexity of the process lies thus in the initial phase of the project, and the breakdown of systems into systems which is usually very time-consuming.

2.1.1 Systems thinking and engineering

In order to have a successful SE approach it is of importance to have systems thinking ca-pabilities within the organization. For this reason, it is important to know what systems thinking means. According to Haines [2010], systems thinking is an old but newly rediscov-ered holistic view of systems in dynamic environment. The purpose of systems thinking is to clarify the interdependence and connectedness of systems within systems with an inte-grated and holistic approach. A system is defined as “a set of elements or components that work together in relationships for the overall objectives/vision of the whole.” [Haines, 2010]. Miller [1978] describes the systems thinking as "The seven levels of living". These are:

(22)

4. Group, team or department 5. Organization

6. Society or community 7. Earth

In an organizational change, the relevant aspects are 3. Individual, 4. Group, team or department and 5. Organization [Ramakrishnan and Testani, 2011]. For each level, the complexity increases, and as the complexity increases there raises a need for systems think-ing, see Figure 3.

Figure 3: Need of systems thinking with increasing complexity [Ramakrishnan and Testani, 2011]

Haines [2010] explains further that complexity is created in the interfaces of each level and leading to what people perceive as chaos. The collaboration of these three levels is one-to-one, team-to-team, and organization-to-environment. When applying SE approach to an organization it is thus of importance to consider these three means of communication. In infrastructure projects, the one-to-one communication is the communication within the project team, the team-to-team communication could be translated to the communication in-between other project teams and cross-functional communication in-in-between departments and lastly the organization-to-environment communication can be translated to external factors all departments must face.

2.2 Requirements engineering

(23)

systems and subsystems is illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4: The RE system hierarchy [Watton, 2001]

2.2.1 The RE process

To manage the complexity of the RE process, it has been divided into two parts: Require-ments development and requireRequire-ments management. The requireRequire-ments development process starts with gathering the requirements from the stakeholders followed by the tasks where one must analyze, negotiate and develop a specification [Kotonya and Sommerville, 1998]. The stakeholders are often in these categories:

1. those who are responsible for its design and development

2. those with a financial interest responsible for its sale or for its purchase 3. those responsible for its introduction and maintenance within an organization 4. those who will use it or have an interest in its use. [Macaulay, 1996]

Within the STA, the investment department corresponds to category 1. and also for cate-gory 3. since they are introducing the road or railway to the community. The maintenance department falls within category 3. The planning departments falls within the second cate-gory and might also need to be involved in the RE process. The fourth catecate-gory is the rest of the organization, regulations, legislation and other stakeholders who affect the construction and is affected of the end product. An important group in category 4. is the road users and those who are directly concerned by the project (e.g. landowners, whose land the STA claim for producing a road).

(24)

Figure 5: RE process in a diagram [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013] The development process is consisting of four steps [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013].

1. Elicitation: This is the process where one identifies and discovers requirements from different stakeholders. In this phase it is important to not see the system as static, as stakeholders might change their minds when the possibilities of the project are seen more clearly. This is usually because of the client often do not exactly know what they need in the initial phase of a projects [Goguen and Linde, 1993]. The methods used in the elicitation phase are usually interviews, workshops, meetings, questionnaire etc. [Distanont, 2013]. [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013] have explained this process in these steps:

• Identifying user classes and stakeholders • Understanding tasks and goals

• Learning about the environment where the product is going to be used

• Working with individuals of the user class to understand the functionality and quality expectation

2. Analysis: In this phase the requirements are classified, evaluated depending on qual-ity and feasibilqual-ity, represented and then negotiated in order to prioritize and resolve conflicts among different stakeholders. The activities in this phase are described as:

• Analyzing the information received and identifying different types of requirements e.g. functional, technical or business requirement.

• Decomposing high-level requirement into an appropriate level • Deriving functional requirements

• Understanding the quality attributes

(25)

3. Documentation: This is the phase where the requirements are documented and allo-cated into a requirements specification document. The main activity of this phase is to re-write the requirements in order to have an overview and to make them comprehen-sible and usable. In this phase it is of importance to know what a good requirement is. The criterion for a good requirement is often summarized into these factors: nec-essary, understandable, valid and current, traceable, rated, implementable, consistent, classifiable, agreed upon, correct, comprehensive, testable and unambiguous. In or-der to write the requirements, templates can be developed explaining step-by-step the writing process. Rupp [2004] has created such a template which can be seen in Figure 6.

Figure 6: The requirements template developed by Rupp [2004]

4. Validation and verification: This is the final phase of the requirements development. The validation process determines whether the project satisfies the customer need i.e. "Are we building the right product?". The verification process is on the other hand evaluating if the products satisfies the specifications i.e. "Are we building the product right?" [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013]. The activities that this phase consist of is:

• Reviewing the documented requirements before handing it off • Developing method for validating and verification

The management of requirements consists of four steps [Wiegers and Beatty, 2013]. The aim of requirements management is to manage changes in the requirements by organizing, tracing and documenting the changes in the development process [Parviainen et al., 2005].

1. Requirements identification: In this part requirements is identified and stored. This includes writing labels to them.

2. Requirements traceability: Requirements changes are linked and there are opportuni-ties to follow the requirement in the whole life-cycle

3. Requirements change management: A process for changing the requirement. In this part the maturity and stability of a requirement play a role in the process. Low maturity and stability of a requirement leads to means higher risks of the stakeholder changing mind and thus requirement

4. Requirements management planning: This usually consists of a manual where the pro-cedure of requirements management is described.

(26)

the reuse of requirements. The reuse of requirements contributes to standardizing projects in an organization [Lam et al., 1997]. The requirements reuse task includes identifying reusable requirements, evaluating the identified requirements for usage in current project and tailoring them to the situation.

2.2.2 Illustrating the SE and RE approach: The V-model, spiral model and lean ap-proach

There are several models illustrating the SE approach and the RE process. The most known of them is the V-model which illustrates the breaks of the system requirements to sub-systems and units. The V-model can be translated in every industry and as a first step of implementing SE approaches in an organization, the V-model can been used [Mathur and Malik, 2010]. If the system is determined and well-defined it should be possible to break it down to subsystems in an appropriate level of detail. Additionally, it must be possible to trace the requirement so that the requirement can be followed through the life of the project and in changes.

The V-model excels at illustrating the division into subsystems in a time aspect. Within every level, a RE process should be ongoing which ends with document approval by ver-ification. The V-model also illustrates the verification and validation processes of every requirement [Wiley, 2015]. Every requirement defined in each level must be validated and verified, which means that within every subsystem, there must be an iterative work-flow. The left hand-side represents the design and RE process of a project and the actual con-struction is in the bottom of the V-model. The right hand-side of the V-model is illustrating the verification and validation of the done construction, see Figure 7.

Figure 7: V-diagram: Systems engineering process for software development [Wiley, 2015]

(27)

Figure 8: The RE process iterative and spiral Sommerville [2010]

The different approaches to the RE process can also help in the analysis phase which can be highly time-consuming. In this aspect combining the V-model with an iterative or lean approach in the requirements engineering process could tackle the bottlenecks created in the RE process [Fanmuy et al., 2012]. In this approach tasks that produce value for the users and stakeholders are prioritized which contributes to increased quality of the end product i.e. requirements specification.

2.3 Factors affecting process

The importance of having the right process was introduced by Liker [2004] when describing "The Toyota way". With the introduction of the lean approach, the deliveries must be based on customer value and a pull work is recommended throughout a working process in order to avoid bottlenecks. It is also important to have a standardized way of working in order to achieve continuous improvements. According to Kettinger and Grover [1995], when improving a process it is of importance to consider the organizational environment that creates the support to a change. The context which the organization is in can highly affect the characteristics of processes and the ability to change. Other factors that may influence the process is Management, IT, Structure and People [Kettinger et al., 1997].

2.3.1 Organizational context and procurement

(28)

A general fact within project management is that projects are regarded as successful if the product is delivered within the right time, price and quality standards along with achieving client satisfaction [Naoum and Egbu, 2015]. A public bureaucracy’s main work is char-acterized by motivating different investments, communicating and decision making with hierarchical organizational structure [Kaufman, 1981]. However, the external environment often have a significant impact on the work too [Perry and Rainey, 1988]. As a governmental agency, the STA is also characterized by bureaucracy and long democratic processes [Meyer, 1979]. The huge amount stakeholder’s and external influences have thus huge impact on the outcome of a project. According to MacDonald [2002], the uncertainty in the external environment can cause changes in both project costs and benefits. Some of these factors are the political influences and changed policies or social changes. For instance, the sensitivity to environmental factors have increased, which have led to higher development costs in road projects [MacDonald, 2002]. Furthermore, institutions sponsoring the projects and the econ-omy of the country can also have an impact on appraising future and current projects due to changes in the budget. The changes in legislation and regulations, especially regarding health and safety, can also influence projects outcomes. Not following these legislation leads often to higher risk and thus high price premium in procurement and must be managed during the project life-cycles. Prior to a procurement the market size and concentration, i.e. the balance of supply and demand, can influence the uncertainty of pricing. It is thus of importance to have a healthy competitive market in order to obtain low tender prices [MacDonald, 2002].

The influence, the procurement process and choice of suppliers has on the project deliv-ery, has been investigated as early as in the 60s by Banwell and Emerson [Love et al., 1998]. In the last three decades various procurement methods have been introduced depending on the project characteristics [Naoum and Egbu, 2015]. Among these contracts is the so called design-bid-build (DBB) the most traditional. However, more innovative types of contracts like design-build (DB) or engineering-procurement-construction (EPC) are also widely ap-plied in the industry [Liu et al., 2014]. The differences between these contracts differ in term of allocation of responsibilities, activities sequencing, process and procedure and orga-nizational approach in project delivery. In a study made by Perry [1985], three types of procurement systems have been identified, i.e. traditional, design and build and manage-ment [Abdul Rashid et al., 2006]. Thus, a traditional DBB contract means a linear process with different organizations responsible for the design and construction, a DB contract has an integrated process where the contractor is responsible for design and build, and manage-ment contracting means that the contracted pays a fee to manage, procure and supervise the design rather than to build. The traditional procurement contract DBB has the slowest project delivery approach [Idrus et al., 2011]. It is also considered to contribute to creating a professional barrier to innovative change; however, it is often preferable due to the fact that it provides more design and construction control for the client. Even though the DB contract is more fast-tracking, it may not be chosen because of the contractors prefers com-petitive bids over sustainable solutions like environmentally sensitive solutions [Naoum and Egbu, 2015]. These factors raise questions regarding the type of procurement suitable for a governmental agency [Huse, 2002].

(29)

DBB contracts which means that they procure the land acquisition plan, architecting and production separately. However, as their aim is to become a refined client more DB contracts are chosen so that the procurement of land acquisition plan and architecting are procured together. As they are a governmental agency they must follow the Public Procurement Acts, which requires having competitive tendering where the contractors are submitting bids in order to develop a competition environment with transparency. However, there are draw-backs with these kinds of procurements [Eriksson and Westerberg, 2011]. One of the main issues is that, generally, the lowest bidders are unqualified contractors with limited resources and low proficiency, causing low performance and delays in the project [Assaf and Al-Hejji, 2006]. Authors such as Ahola et al. [2008], Eriksson and Westerberg [2011], Nuseibeh and Easterbrook [2000], Assaf and Al-Hejji [2006] have earlier investigated success factors, or fac-tors leading for delay in projects pointing out the importance of understanding the client’s requirements. Consequently, it is of importance to have a calculable requirements specifica-tion. This emphasizes the importance of having a good requirements specification prior to procurement in the STA. A good requirements specification must be expressive, objective, simple, calculable and generally applicable [Starossek and Haberland, 2008]. To achieve this, it is of importance to have a working requirements engineering process [Nuseibeh et al., 1994].

2.3.2 IT

When implementing a process, the IT aspect is one of the features to be considered since it provides the necessary means for the transformation. IT provides with capturing, dis-tributing, coordinating, monitoring, enabling analysis and decision making of information in an organization [Kettinger et al., 1997]. According to Venkatraman [1994], IT is one of the fundamental enablers for a transformation and have direct consequences on knowledge, culture, people and tasks, affecting both the organizational culture and learning [Kettinger and Grover, 1995]. However, it is of importance to know that the change in IT tools is not going to make the transformation within the organization [Markus and Benjamin, 1997]. Especially, the IT used in a process must be considered together with the people aspect. A balance in-between all these three capabilities, i.e. IT, process, and people, are required to have a successful change.

2.3.3 People

People oriented aspects, in an organization, are one of the aspects needed to be considered for being successful. In a process, the factors influencing the people in the organization are values, skills, culture and behavior [Kettinger et al., 1997]. The three most challenging factors in the process are i. changing mindset and attitudes, ii. corporate culture and iii. underestimated complexity of the process [Henrik Jørgensen et al., 2009].

(30)

2.3.4 Management

One of the biggest challenges is the employees’ resistance to change. According to Kotter [1995], if the sense of urgency is not enough then people will not take the initiative of taking a step outside their own comfort zone. The resistance can especially be large if there is a threat to the organizational identity [Jacobs et al., 2013]. This is due to the risk of the change might not satisfy every employee and that the whole human factor can easily be ignored. In organizations many leaders are not familiar or believe that there are some people that are resistant to change. Here the communication is important, especially discussions and feedback between the management and the employees. Thus, it is important to have the right leadership in a change project, i.e. a listening leader who is engaged in the employees [Jackson and Parry, 2011].

2.3.5 Structure

According to Kettinger and Grover [1995], the structure of the organization has a large impact on the projects too. This aspect consists of formal and informal organizational structure including jobs, teams and other coordinating mechanisms. This aspect, is similar with the different types of communications describes in section 2.1.1 Systems thinking and engineering. It is thus considered that the SE approach and the Structure aspect described by Kettinger and Grover [1995] is describing a similar subject in the context of this thesis.

2.4 Synthetizing the theoretical themes

The theoretical themes that have been considered in this chapter are SE approach, RE processes, organizational context, IT, people, communication and management. Inspired by Kettinger et al. [1997], a theoretical framework has been synthesized. Since the described communication structure was highly similar to the SE approach, these factors have been compounded. The theoretical themes’ association with each other is illustrated in Figure 9.

(31)

Summary

(32)

(33)

Methodology

3 Methodology

The aim of this chapter is to present the methods used for fulfilling the purpose of the thesis to the readers. This chapter starts with presenting the research approach and describes the four-step research process. Furthermore, it describes the methods used for data collection. In the end of the chapter, a discussion regarding the quality of the study is given in order to make the reader aware of the validity, reliability and generalizability of this study.

The purpose of this thesis was to investigate the challenges that arise with the implementa-tion of SE approaches and RE processes. The purpose was also to discuss possible methods to manage these barriers. In order to fulfill the purpose a case study with qualitative research approach was chosen.

3.1 Research approach

As earlier mentioned the overall purpose of this study is to investigate the challenges that rise with the implementation of systematic requirements management in infrastructure projects in the Swedish Transport Administration. According to Yin [2013] the case study method is appropriate when the research question serves an explanatory and descriptive purpose, when the investigator has little possibility to control events and when contemporary phenomenon in a real-life context is studied. The research questions of this study are chosen, as what Collis and Hussey [2013] are describing, of descriptive and explanatory nature. This study was also set within a context where the researcher’s control of the behavioral events where insignificant. In order to explain the phenomenon in the real-life context a single case study was chosen to obtain a deeper knowledge about the phenomena instead of having breadth. These factors fulfill the three conditions by Yin [2013] and thus a single case study was chosen as the most appropriate method.

Challenges with this method is that the boundaries between the phenomenon and its real–life context not being evident due to its nature of being socially complex. This means that the studies often are too situation specific and provide little basis for scientific generalization [Yin, 2013]. However, as it is further explained the study can be useful and generalized in wider context by applying the identified theoretical propositions to other situations. An-other challenge is that the case studies often take too long time and are more difficult to analyze. This was considered in this study, by having clear time frames and having a sys-tematic reporting of the evidence gathered in empirical findings.

According to Blomkvist and Hallin [2015] case study method generates rich empirical ma-terial where the complexity of the reality is captured and is suitable when one wants to answer questions beginning with how or why, which this study aims to answer too. For this case, the abductive approach was chosen which allows alternating between the empirics and the theory and thus enabling a deeper understanding of the phenomena [Alvesson and Sköldberg, 2009]. The abductive approach has meant alternating of theory and empirical facts which enabled reinterpretation of the case in the light of each other. In this way the process goes from being specific to being general[Collis and Hussey, 2013].

(34)

Methodology

this, the study was designed as a four step process which started with 1.Planning and an introductory literature review, 2. Making the case study by switching between empirical data collection (by document gathering, observations and interviews) and literature review, 3. Developing a theoretical framework and 4. Validating conclusions

The timeframe of the thesis work was in 20 weeks. Since the area of infrastructure projects was new for the researcher, it was of importance to develop a basic understanding of the STA as an organization by literature review view of how a governmental agency work, in-frastructure/transportation project management.

3.2 Data collection

The empirical data collection was done by having interviews, observations and document gathering i.e. having qualitative approach. This method was chosen as the main method due to the interest of gathering the attitudes of the changes in the organization. Rowley [2012] states that in order to gain insights of the opinions, attitudes and experiences of special subject it is appropriate to use interviews as a method for conducting qualitative research. Hence, the main method for data collection in this study has been by conducting interviews. Since the purpose of this thesis have been to investigate the implementation of engineering approaches and processes in an organization in the whole life-cycle of a project, extending to the interface of several departments and other factors, a quantitative study would not be suitable. A quantitative study would not give a thorough analysis and cover the complexity that is required in order to answer the research questions and fulfill the purpose. On the other hand, a qualitative study has provided the inquired material, i.e. the analysis of the variables, for answering the research question.

3.2.1 Interviews

The interviews were conducted in a semi-constructed way in order to understand the respon-dent, their perception of the processes and opinions about future possibilities. For this, it was required to adapt to the respondent with various, forms, number of questions, adapted questions etc. This is important in order to accommodate the respondents [Rowley, 2012]. Prior to each interview 6-12 questions regarding the relevant identified subjects were written and the follow up questions were often in form “Why...?” in order to obtain more explanation that aimed at finding the core-problem. Totally 9 interviews were conducted with represen-tatives of different departments and stakeholders in order to obtain a more holistic view of how methods used within the department are perceived by their stakeholders.

(35)

Methodology

Table I: Overview of interviewees

3.2.2 Observations

Observations were also made by participating as a spectator in one meeting where the requirements development was the main subject. In this meeting an overview of the working method was observed in order to obtain an understanding of how they today are working with the requirements engineering. Observations were made of one project team consisting of a project engineer and one part-project manager with another project manager participating online. In this way an in-depth understanding of the requirements development process was obtained. However, there are also disadvantages of using the observations methodology such as the spectator role. The awareness of the participants being observed may have affected the situation and behavior. This has an impact on the validity of the observations. These factors were considered when making the observations and only the most relevant aspects, especially the usage of the IT-tool, were included in the thesis.

Document gathering

(36)

Methodology

3.2.3 Literature review

The literature study was made along with the empirical data collection and the choices of topics have been developed by time. The literature was collected from the search engines Google, Google Scholar and KTHB which provided the most relevant scientific articles. The used keywords started mainly with requirements engineering, systems engineering, project-based organizations, infrastructure projects and with the choice of specialization of improving the process the keywords process change, IT, management and communication was added. Among the articles, it was mainly the ones that had most been cited or the ones that were most useful for this study that was chosen.

3.2.4 Development of the theoretical framework and the V-model

The development of the theoretical framework started with considering the aspect of im-proving the working process and the support from the management. However, with time the scope of the project developed to also considering the procurement process and the ending phase of the project. The framework developed by Kettinger et al. [1997] illustrat-ing a business change model was adapted to the context of this thesis. The adaptation of the framework to this thesis has given insight of the similarities between the theory about organizational structure and SE approaches. Within this scope empirical material was con-ducted in order to identify barriers within the process. The context was also illustrated by the V-model, see Appendix, illustrating the whole lifecycle of the project along with every phase within the project management. Hence this study emphasizes the important aspects of using the V-model in the RE process in the organization and the theoretical framework as describing the context.

3.2.5 Data analysis and verification

For analysis a thematic approach was used where the themes SE approach, RE process, organizational context, procurement, IT, Management and Structure were used. These were later in the thesis reduced to the categories SE approach, RE process and Sub factors affect-ing the process. This was then synthesized to the theoretical framework in the thesis and which was verified by the STA, as the main stakeholder of the thesis.

3.3 Quality of study

3.3.1 Validity

Validity is by Blomkvist and Hallin [2015] defined as studying the right things. In this study the validity is reached by having a thorough review of articles and reports from research or-ganization and larger journals. Another reason for this study having high validity is that the data gathering methods are strongly based on the purposes and research questions. Since the gathered literature was mainly about the SE approach and RE process applied in differ-ent industries there might be some biases in some articles in order to make these approaches used wider extend. Thus, something that was needed for higher validity was evaluation if the SE approach is the optimal one for managing the complexity in the industry. However, this has been managed by finding literature giving of examples where large infrastructure projects successfully have used the SE approach in their projects.

(37)

Methodology

validity due to the fact that it might be hard to study the right thing. To achieve higher validity, it is proposed to use several sources were evidence is taken from and by having a verification by the interviewees [Yin, 2013]. In this thesis, multiple sources have been used, for example interviews, observations and document, and in this way achieved triangulation. The thesis had also a verification phase in order to obtain higher validity. In this study the main way of conducting empirical material has been by semi-structured interviews which open up a risk of misunderstanding of statements. The recording of the interviews and lis-tening to them over again when more knowledge about the subject was gathered helped in this aspect and all the sources have critically been viewed. Detected weaknesses have been addressed directly to the interviewee or been completed by additional resources. In this way the validity of the study increased.

3.3.2 Reliability

Reliability of a study can be reached by studying the right way [Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015]. Also, the reliability of a study argues for obtaining the same result if the research was re-conducted. According to Yin [2013] low reliability is often due to insufficient documenting the research procedure. The identified barriers of the requirements process can be discussed. Conducting this study alone, had its limitations on analyzing the data, which may also have an impact on the results as it increases the risk on missed aspects. This was managed by relistening and transcribing the interviews.

The semi-structured way of interviewing might lower the reliability of this study. In order to avoid low reliability the interviews were recorded, transcribed and summarized throughout the process. Similar questions were asked to every interviewee, since their views upon the same subject were interesting.

3.3.3 Generalizability

The generalizability of the study is limited to the context that this study was set within. According to Collis and Hussey [2013] by demonstrating some important concepts that could be part of a theory the study could be generalized. However, as the study is a case study it is highly dependent on the context which it is set within and the generalizability of the findings can be a challenge.

Even though the study is highly dependent on the context, it can be used in order to identify new aspects regarding implementing requirements engineering, especially writing functional requirements in construction or infrastructure projects. It can also contribute with empirical material within the field of systems theory where the implementation of systems thinking and systems engineering approaches can be used when implementing the organization. This is possible since the theory used for both disciplines can be applied no matter the character-istic of the industry. The study might be especially useful for other Swedish governmental agencies trying to improve their requirements management and organizations that generally are trying to adapt to SE approaches and RE processes.

Summary

(38)

litera-Methodology

ture review, 2. Making the case study by switching between empirical data collection (by document gathering, observations and interviews) and literature review, 3. Developing a theoretical framework and 4. Verifying conclusions. The quality of the study can be dis-cussed especially since the characteristics of a case study leads to lower reliability. However, methods such as recording, triangulation and documenting have been made in order to in-crease the quality of the study.

(39)

Background of the organization

4 Background of the organization

The aim of this chapter is to set the reader to the context of the STA. A description of the background will be followed by a description of the departments having a major role in the infrastructure projects. The chapter ends with a description of the need of RE processes in the STA.

4.1 The Swedish Transportation Administration

In 2011, a change process towards being a professional refined client was initiated within the Swedish Transportation Administration and the organizational change is still ongoing [Eriksson et al., 2017]. The initiative of being a refined client has meant handing over greater commitments and responsibilities to suppliers and consultants. The aim of this change was to improve the innovation and productivity in the supplier market and the construction indus-try and consequently, in long-term, obtain better results, goal fulfillment and social benefits. In the project governance, the change has meant a new method of procurement where the suppliers propose methods and solutions which the STA as a client accepts. Less emphasizes are thus put on ordering technical solutions and requirements and more focus is put on or-dering functionality in a procurement [Eriksson et al., 2017]. The change into being a refined client has been implemented in a larger degree in the road production than in railway as a consequence of the historical background of the railway projects. Historically the railway projects have been designed, constructed and maintained in the organization which makes the transformation harder. Additionally, as there is higher risk of catastrophic consequences of railway accidents, the railway projects must manage more safety risks which make the change into the reliance on the market more challenging in the railway projects than road projects [Eriksson et al., 2017].

As a purchaser and leader client in the infrastructure and construction sector, the STA has the responsibility to develop and influence the sector into being more efficient and pro-ductive. Consequently, to have an efficient impact on the whole industry emphasizes must be put in having good internal working processes. In this way, the STA can be a model to the rest of the industry. Even though the transformation into being a refined client has not yet been fulfilled, their strategy must be considered when implementing a new working process within the organization’s projects.

4.2 Departments with major role in the project management of the

infras-tructure projects

(40)

4.2.1 Planning department

The planning department is responsible of planning of the railway and road infrastruc-ture in Sweden and also over the long term planning for the maritime and aviation [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015]. The planning department has also a role as an internal purchaser/client in the STA. They identify shortcomings of roads and railways in Sweden, investigate according to a four-step principle, coordinate national and regional transport policy plans, sign agreements regarding sponsoring with, for instance, the munic-ipality or regions, and formulate actions and measures that are then ordered by investment to suppliers. They have early dialogues with representatives of industry and stakeholders which are often made in so called consultation meetings. They cooperate with various actors at high level to identify needs and deficiencies in the transport system and find measures to meet them. Thorough investigations and analysis are made, which are used as support for making action plans. The action plans must in turn be accepted as a solution with consensus by all participating stakeholders.

In the ideation phase, the solution of a problem is considered, which is usually made with a four-step strategic method called choice of measures. The method aims to create a broader perspective in the problem solving by having a high level of participation of all stakehold-ers. The four steps consist of four action plans in prioritized order. The first step/action plan/measure is hence preferred over the other solutions due to budget constrictions. The four steps are:

1. Thinking new: Choosing measures that affect the need for transport and the choice of mode of transportation, for example, moving the bus station.

2. Optimize: Using existing infrastructure in a more effective way. 3. Reconstruct: Choosing reconstruction measures.

4. Constructing new: If the above three alternatives do not work, then new investments will be made.

Lastly, they formulate the targets of the measures/actions and orders from the investment department which is responsible for the realization and implementation.

4.2.2 Investment department

The investment department is responsible for procurement, execution and monitoring the reconstruction projects and new investments in the STA. The operations of the department embrace the whole execution process for investments and development projects from procur-ing land acquisition plan to construction document and lastly to construction. One project team in the department consists of a project manager and project engineers with the respon-sibilities of procurement and communication. Land negotiators and specialist work often as a support for the projects, but are not included in the project management team.

(41)

and others who are directly affected is important.

The project governance process in the investment department is made of continuously mon-itoring and reporting the project to the management in the measures of Time, Cost and Content. The three measures are determining the budget of the project. In these reports, the current status of the project is reported and changes are explained. For instance, a change in the cost measure could be due to overrun in time and changes in the content measures could be due to new requirements in the project scope. In the project, traditional project management is used with decision-making that is formed in a stage-gate method with toll-gates. The project model XLPM is used and describes the project management process, from ordering to the final delivery of the product. Translated into the practices in the investment department, the process consists of procurement of land acquisition plan, architecting, production and finished construction which is introduced to road-users. The requirements are mainly identified in the land acquisition plan prior to procurement of the architecting. Thus, the identifying and development of the requirements continue in two lev-els, where in the second level the requirements specification for procurement of production is managed.

4.2.3 Procurement process within a project

Today, the STA faces challenges regarding public procurement where the tender document and requirements specification are included. Even though the tender documents specify what should be delivered in a straightforward manner, the requirements are deficient mak-ing the requirements specification document unclear and non-calculable. The vaguely and unclearly formulated requirements lead to suppliers being able to speculate about what the organization really wants. The incalculable document leads often to a not sustainable envi-ronment of competition and a high yield of tenders. This is a challenge which is continuously addressed in the organization which aims to create a sustainable procurement environment. This would contribute with more opportunities for large procurements and attract larger global companies. Also, a proper procurement environment would develop the market for small and medium-sized companies in Sweden [Eriksson et al., 2017].

(42)

Figure 10: Procurement process [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015] In line with the change into being a refined client organization, the aim is turning into using design-build (DB) contracts instead of using design-bid-build (DBB) contracts in the procurement. In follow-ups made within the STA, the DB contracts have led to lower tenders and lower project costs [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015]. This has also led to increased feedback from the suppliers, and thus shorter project implementation. A DB contract means also that the functional requirements are used in a greater extent. This has meant a major change in the interface between the Swedish Transportation and suppliers. The organization should thus leave more design work to suppliers and avoid technical solutions in their contracts [Eriksson et al., 2017].

4.2.4 Maintenance department

The maintenance department is responsible of maintaining and developing road and railway systems, and also of developing and administering the technical system included in the road and railway systems [The Swedish Transportation Administration, 2015]. They are one of the main requirements owner within the road or railway project and are one of the main internal stakeholders. They have a major role in the design phase of roads and streets in order to make them maintainable. For example, to be able to plow during winters, the carriages must drive through the road which sets a requirement on the width of the road. In the end phase of the project, the investment department legally handover the responsibility of operations and traffic damages in the roads/railways to the maintenance department.

4.3 Factors for implementing systematic requirements engineering in the

STA

(43)

The need of structuring the requirements is one of the main reasons for implementing systematic requirements management. As the amount of requirements made on projects increases and changes faster, the importance of getting them structured gets clearer. Like other industries, infrastructure projects have regulations such as EU requirements and cus-tomer requests to keep track of. Furthermore, the products are built up in reality where every action has an impact on the environment. Unlike other industries, it is thus not pos-sible to make mistakes, back one step, and do the right without affecting the environment negatively [Nordqvist, 2013]. The working process also highlights the importance of the verifying and validating of the requirements, so that at the ending phase of the project, every requirement have been fulfilled and one can trace them throughout the journey. The handover from investment department to maintenance is simplified by making the valida-tion easier to plan. As many of the employees, especially project managers, have memorized the internal routines, it is easier to miss new requirements. The misses are sometimes not discovered until it is very expensive to make changes. However, as wrong requirements and incorrectly fulfilled requirements are cheaper to rectify at an early stage, the dependencies and new requirements must be identified early in the project in order to prevent major costs later in the project.

Another reason for the need of change is new regulations and legislation. There is a need of better management of the requirements especially in the railway projects. The need has be-come more apparent since the EU requirements, Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI), began to apply to all railway installations [Nordqvist, 2013]. The TSI requirements are used for approval of railway installations and make strict demands on follow-up and traceability of requirements. Except for the external requirements management, it is also common that there are lacks in the internal requirements management too, due to require-ments made by the maintenance department can easily be missed if they are contradicting the document of Roads’ and streets’ design (VGU).

Another important factor for implementing this process is to achieve a more standardized way of working in-between the project managers in the investment department. Currently, there is not a standardized way of working regarding the requirements management in a project and every project manager has their own way of eliciting and analyzing the require-ments. There are often too much requirements, so that the project managers cannot verify whether the requirements are fulfilled or not.

(44)

Summary

As the STA aims for using more DB contracts in their procurement their focus is on requir-ing functionality. This change have an impact on the requirements process in the STA. The planning department is like an in-house client to the projects in the investment department. The maintenance department is, in the end phase, responsible for maintaining the roads or railways and have a role as an internal stakeholder. The complexity of the projects sets a need for structuring the requirements management in the STA.