The fact-finding techniques used during investigation: interviews, questionnaires, observation and inspection of documents, with the advantages and disadvantages of each.

What this dot point is asking

CCEA wants you to describe the fact-finding techniques an analyst uses during investigation, interviews, questionnaires, observation and document inspection, and to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each so you can recommend the right technique for a situation. Fact-finding is how the requirements specification is built.

The fact-finding techniques

• Interviews. One-to-one questioning of staff. Rich, detailed information with the chance to follow up unclear answers, but time-consuming, so only a few people can be interviewed, and the interviewer may bias the answers.
• Questionnaires. Written questions sent to many people. Reach a large number quickly and cheaply, and closed questions are easy to analyse, but the information is shallow, there is no follow-up, and response rates can be low.
• Observation. Watching staff at work. Shows what people actually do rather than what they say, but people may behave differently when watched (the Hawthorne effect), and it only captures the period observed.
• Document inspection. Examining existing forms, reports and records. Reveals the real data, formats and rules in use, but documents may be out of date or incomplete.

Choosing the right technique

The choice follows the need. To understand a manager's priorities, interview; to survey hundreds of customers, use a questionnaire; to see how a process really runs, observe; to size and format existing data, inspect documents. Because no single technique is complete, a good investigation triangulates: for example, observe a process, then interview the operator to explain what was seen, then inspect the documents the process produces.

Why fact-finding quality matters

The requirements specification is only as good as the facts behind it. Poor fact-finding (for example interviewing one person and assuming they speak for everyone) produces missed or wrong requirements, which propagate into a flawed design and a system that does not fit. Combining techniques and checking findings against each other is what makes the requirements trustworthy.

Try this

Q1. State the fact-finding technique best suited to gathering shallow information from a large number of people. [1 mark]

• Cue. A questionnaire.

Q2. Give one advantage and one disadvantage of observation as a fact-finding technique. [2 marks]

• Cue. Advantage: it shows what staff actually do, including informal workarounds. Disadvantage: people may behave differently when watched (the Hawthorne effect), and it only captures the observed period.

Q3. Explain why an analyst usually combines several fact-finding techniques. [2 marks]

• Cue. No single technique gives depth, breadth, real behaviour and factual data at once, so combining them lets the strengths of one cover the weaknesses of another and allows findings to be cross-checked.