I define requirements analysis as the work I do to examine elicited stakeholder needs so I can understand and document them. In practice, I take what stakeholders tell me and turn it into clear, testable statements. In addition, this activity sits at the core of requirements engineering, because it transforms raw input into implementable content.
First, I identify each statement and give it a clear name. Next, I classify it by type, for example business, user, system, functional, non-functional, interface, quality, or constraint. Moreover, I note solution dependence. Specifically, I separate solution-independent goals from statements that describe desired system behavior or processes. Then, I flag items that already assume a specific technical approach. By doing this, I reduce ambiguity and improve the chance of correct implementation.
Traceability and identifiability belong to the foundation. I assign unique IDs and link items to sources, design elements, tests, and versions. Consequently, I can answer who changed what and when. This supports audits and legal obligations such as SOX. In addition, safety contexts benefit from the same rigor, for example when IEC 61508 applies and mapping to safety integrity levels becomes necessary.
Standards guide how I structure the work. For example, ISO/IEC 12207 and ISO/IEC 15288 describe system and software life cycle processes that include analysis and management tasks. In addition, industry templates and guidelines help define a consistent approach. Therefore, I plan elicitation, documentation, validation, negotiation, and change control as connected activities.
I capture the approach in a Requirements Management Plan. Specifically, I document the process, tools, information model, attribute schema, prioritization method, traceability rules, views and reports, versioning policy, change process, and variant management. Moreover, I keep the plan concise and share it early so stakeholders agree on the rules.
Tools support structure and linking. For example, I store attributes such as priority, owner, status, and rationale. In addition, I create links that show derivation and dependency. Moreover, I use diagrams when they add value. In particular, state or process diagrams support more formal checks, such as reachability analysis or test derivation. Therefore, I often combine textual statements with diagrams to improve clarity and automation potential.
A defined change process keeps the set consistent. First, I record each change request. Then, I evaluate impact, update links, and revise the affected statements. Finally, I update versions and the plan if needed. Consequently, the overall set stays coherent over time.
In conclusion, requirements analysis is a practical, disciplined activity. I combine classification, traceability, standards alignment, and selective formalization. As a result, I produce content that teams can implement, verify, and maintain. Moreover, I keep the wording clear and translation-friendly by using short sentences and precise terms.