ArchiMate and managing requirements

Etienne,

Re: functional requirements, you can use Function Allocation Diagram, Requirement Allocation Diagram and, for that matter, Access Diagram. Your ArchiMate 'Business Process' or 'Business Function' is allowed in all three of them as it is a <<Function>>.  And you can link directly <<Function>> with <<Requirement>> in the first two models and both of them to <<Application System Type>> in the third. Then again ArchiMate 'Application Component' is <<Application System Type>>. If symbols are of concern ArchiMate ones can be used in any non-ArchiMate model as well. And you can of course make you ArchiMate-like symbol for <<Requirement>> with Aris Symbol Editor.

The lack of support for motivational domain is admitted in ArchiMate specification 1.0  and included in Chapter 11 "Future Directions". Last year there was one very good attempt to suggest ArchiMate motivation extension.

Another approach is to use UML Use Case diagram which could be generated as transformation of <<Function>> from any model or group (ARIS DB context). There are many benefits in using ArchiMate and UML together. And ARIS is really ready for that with the way all methods reuse as many as possible from the existing object types. That's something really nice which I find underutilised by many users.

I think that this or a similar approach can be applied for non-functional requirements as well.

Thanks Ivo, I agree, I do use the FAD where there is a function to depict business & functional requirements. It is non functional requirements (NFR) where I have the problem. NFR's are associated to application system objects (no FAD). NFR's can be applicable for the complete solution (IT system) or to specific application components. I'm trying to find a way of associating them directly to application system type objects in Archimate views?

Another thought I had was to use the group object (structural element) and then to assign a requirements tree to indicate the requirements?

Why don't you use 'Meaning' with a new symbol "Requirement"? As you know 'Meaning' is  ARIS <<Knowledge Category>> object type. A think it will work well. And then, isn't it appropriate to have a cloud-like representation of things which are sometimes vague and often transient :)

Thanks Ivo, I can, but I already use the requirement object across multiple phases in the SDLC and have scripting that uses the requirement object type.

The only all-method model is the 'Matrix' model. I wish there was a "normal" one or a method-extension mechanism, but...