An interesting phenomenon occurred a couple of months ago when I elicited thoughts and feedback on meaningful requirements engineering (RE) metrics from a few RE practitioners and peers. Project teams across industry are often expected to put forth some sort of indicators for management indicating that their company's investment in the work of writing requirements provides some sort of payoff in the end. As I began my career in RE, I pored over a study from Raytheon1 that comfortably concluded that yes, it is far better to discover lack of alignment or shared understanding in what a team is to develop early. Defects cost less to fix when the system to be released is still in its definition phases, rather than when development hours have been expended, when potential releases are being tested, and certainly before a product is released to its customers as complete. The cost of quality in the form of better practice is lower than the cost of cleanup later.

中文翻译：

---

舒哈日为 RE？需求工程从业者成熟度的敏捷方法

几个月前发生了一个有趣的现象，当时我从一些 RE 从业者和同行那里得到了关于有意义的需求工程 (RE) 指标的想法和反馈。跨行业的项目团队通常会为管理层提出某种指标，表明他们公司在编写需求方面的投资最终会带来某种回报。当我开始我在 RE 的职业生涯时，我仔细阅读了 Raytheon1 的一项研究，该研究得出的结论是，是的，发现团队早期发展缺乏一致性或共同理解要好得多。当要发布的系统仍处于其定义阶段时，修复缺陷的成本更低，而不是在开发时间已经花费时，在测试潜在版本时，当然，在产品完整地发布给客户之前。更好实践形式的质量成本低于后期清理的成本。