Requirements managers need control that engineers can live with. Stable IDs, hierarchy, attributes, baselines and reviews matter, but a process that requires the requirements manager to repair every link will not scale. Evaluate software by the quality of the authoritative set and the routine effort to maintain it.
Who owns each requirements decision?
Define who may author, review, approve and supersede a requirement. Specify what a baseline contains and how a later revision is traced to its reason for change. NASA's requirements-management guidance describes disciplined change and traceability; the customer's contract and programme process determine the exact controls.
Can we review a supplier update?
Use a synthetic supplier-proposed change to a docking-sensor range requirement. Ask a contributor to submit it, a manager to compare it with the approved version, and a reviewer to accept or reject it. Check how the source ID, parent requirement, derived tests and decision record remain connected. Then export the controlled set a supplier would actually receive.
What does maintaining the workflow require?
DOORS can be rational with existing exchange and baseline history. Jama supports structured reviews. Polarion and Codebeamer support broader ALM governance. Arc provides branch review and merge in a connected programme model. Ask ordinary engineers to complete the trial without a requirements specialist mediating every step.
How does the tool handle exceptions?
Find orphan requirements, duplicate identifiers, undefined relationship types and obsolete verification links in a representative source set. See which tool makes these visible and how a repair is approved. Export a sample and confirm that names, IDs and link meaning survive. Software cannot fix unclear ownership, but it can make the ambiguity visible early.
Frequently asked questions
What does a requirements manager need most?
An authoritative baseline with stable IDs, explicit ownership, review decisions and traceable changes that engineers can maintain.
Should every link need manager approval?
The programme must define authority, but requiring one person to hand-repair all links is a maintenance warning.
What should an export trial prove?
That the delivered requirement set has the intended revision, IDs, hierarchy and relationship meaning.
Apply this engineering method in Arc
Arc connects requirements to systems and interfaces, records controlled review decisions and maintains verification evidence against the relevant configuration. Bring one representative requirement set to evaluate this method.
Luc will email from luc@archelps.com to arrange setup. Agree scope and data handling before adding programme information.