RE: Responsibility

--- Kent Beck <kent-hJ4WY/gWbur3XBa+dPFJ6Fr/[email protected]> wrote:
Arien wrote:
> > The common failure mode is to ask the customer 
> > what the software should do, and come back with a list of 
> > features, which we then implement, and wonder why the 
> > customer isn't satisfied. Only after we understand what 
> > drives value should we be talking about features.
> 
> That last sounds a bit like phases. I might say we should continue to
> talk about what drives value as we explore features by implementing and
> deploying them.

Agreed. I do think there is a place for SVUF (V=value): clearly the decision to
build vs. buy vs. don't us software at all requires some understanding of
value, and getting some clarity on value as a team is helpful up-front, as long
as we realize that we aren't going to get it perfect up-front, only over time.
I'd recommend using index cards and writing one benefit per card, then sorting
those benefits into piles of releated benefits (this is part of QFD, and some
of those techniques can be helpful -- the full house of quality and matrix of
matrices is way overkill, however).

This might be the first half-day of an initial planning meeting.

Arien

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/CBxunD/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/NhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extremecustomering-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/