Cited by 309Software Engineering Techniques and PracticesAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesSystems Engineering Methodologies and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process

Open access
Sharp, H., Finkelstein, A., Galal, G.·1999·Proceedings. Tenth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. DEXA 99

Abstract

Adequate, timely and effective consultation of relevant stakeholders is of paramount importance in the requirements engineering process. However, the thorny issue of making sure that all relevant stakeholders are consulted has received less attention than other areas which depend on it, such as scenario-based requirements, involving users in development, negotiating between different viewpoints and so on. The literature suggests examples of stakeholders, and categories of stakeholder, but does not provide help in identifying stakeholders for a specific system. In this paper, we discuss current work in stakeholder identification, propose an approach to identifying relevant stakeholders for a specific system, and propose future directions for the work.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/dexa.1999.795198

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. galal, 1999, Thoughts on Identifying and Managing Stakeholders
  2. gotel, 1995, Contribution Structures, 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE'95), 100
  3. holtzblatt, 1993, Participator?/ Design principles and practice, 177
  4. jacobson, 1992, Object-OrientedSoftware Engineering A Use Case Driven Approach
  5. maccaulay, 1994, Requirements Engineering Social and Technical Issues, 67
  6. 10.5465/AMR.1995.9503271992 · DOI · Paper page
  7. bolton, 1994, Requirements Engineering Social and Technical Issues, 141
  8. van lamsweerde, 1993, The meeting scheduler system ? preliminary definition

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Sharp, H., Finkelstein, A., & Galal, G.
Affiliations
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Venue
Proceedings. Tenth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. DEXA 99
Publisher
IEEE
Published
1999
Pages
387-391
ISSN
1529-4188 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1980141873
Cited by
309
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 16
FWCI
2.49
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA) (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
Keywords
stakeholder identification, requirements engineering, stakeholder consultation, stakeholder categories

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review