Grigory Gusev

Quality of the requirements is more important than quality of any other work document of the software lifecycle. On the other hand, typical requirements quality assurance methods, such as peer review are always costly and often detect only formal and cosmetic defects.

According to Luxoft experience, review is more effective when it is combined with practical validation of the requirements. The reviewers should not go through a checklist with abstract "non-ambiguity, verifiability, or feasibility,.." criteria but should generate draft implementations of the requirements instead, to see if they can be really put into design, test cases, and user documentation. The approach improves quality and non-volatility of the requirements, decreases rework rate on the subsequent phases, and yet does not affect project budget.

Download presentation


16 years of information technology experience, 7 recent years in the area of software process improvement and CMMI appraisal. Design, maintenance and optimization of the software process architecture, process automation requirements, process implementation monitoring and control, and process trainings.

Graduated from the Moscow State Technical University named after Bauman as rocket engine designer in 1995. Since 1994 was a test designer and then system analyst in the software development and maintenance companies. In 2003 to 2007, process engineer at Auriga (software outsourcing, CMMI v1.1 Level 4); organized quality system design and implementation in the emerging and existing projects; developed and delivered process and process automation system trainings; established project internal audits. Since February 2007, senior process engineer in the Luxoft company (CMMI-DEV v1.2 Level 5) and since October 2008 is the SEPG Manager in the Luxoft Aerospace delivery center; optimizing and sustaining of the project processes for a leading US aerospace company, including customer process integration. Participated in the several CMMI Class A, B & C appraisals.