{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020935960591133004, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.258928571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An assessment of the relative efficiency of a facilitator-driven requirements collection process with respect to the conventional interview method

A case is made for the use of "facilitator-driven" requirements collection processes (within suitable parameters), as opposed to the "conventional interview method". Based on the principal author's professional experience, this experience based report presents a comparative and normalized analysis of eight facilitator-led requirements collection sessions with respect to four conventional interview method requirements collection processes. The relative efficiency of the two methods is compared statistically, and conclusions are drawn regarding the improvements in the requirements collection process attributable to the use of the facilitator-driven approach.