<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Requirements vs Design &#8211; Which is Which and Why?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/</link>
	<description>Software product success.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 12:04:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comparing Products Part 4 – Important Problems &#124; The Agile Radar</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-837111</link>
		<dc:creator>Comparing Products Part 4 – Important Problems &#124; The Agile Radar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:05:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-837111</guid>
		<description>[...] it is important to specify the problems and not the design.  This is a tricky one, as it blurs the line between requirements and design.  Reasonable people can make either of the following [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it is important to specify the problems and not the design.  This is a tricky one, as it blurs the line between requirements and design.  Reasonable people can make either of the following [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WHAT and HOW? View from Product Owner perspective …</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-780728</link>
		<dc:creator>WHAT and HOW? View from Product Owner perspective …</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:45:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-780728</guid>
		<description>[...] inspired by this post and problems in daily [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] inspired by this post and problems in daily [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Gartland</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-583726</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Gartland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-583726</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;RT @sehlhorst: Requirements - Why?What?How? http://bit.ly/bUFw2q, http://bit.ly/904axd  -- GREAT overview of why your teams NEED good reqs.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">RT @sehlhorst: Requirements &#8211; Why?What?How? <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a>, <a href="http://bit.ly/904axd" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/904axd</a>  &#8212; GREAT overview of why your teams NEED good reqs.</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-611543</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:42:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-611543</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;Tnx @activescott @hugopw @ruckiand @bainsight @l3n @michael_mba for RTs on how/what/why http://bit.ly/bUFw2q http://bit.ly/904axd &amp; more&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Tnx @activescott @hugopw @ruckiand @bainsight @l3n @michael_mba for RTs on how/what/why <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> <a href="http://bit.ly/904axd" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/904axd</a> &amp; more</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrej Ruckij</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-583196</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrej Ruckij</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-583196</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;RT @sehlhorst: R @bainsight - hooray,welcome to the blue team!  http://bit.ly/bUFw2q &quot;how&quot; is design, &quot;why&quot; is requirements #baot #prodmgmt&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">RT @sehlhorst: R @bainsight &#8211; hooray,welcome to the blue team!  <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> &quot;how&quot; is design, &quot;why&quot; is requirements #baot #prodmgmt</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-611544</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 01:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-611544</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;R @bainsight - hooray , welcome to the blue team!  http://bit.ly/bUFw2q &quot;how&quot; is design, &quot;why&quot; is requirements #baot #prodmgmt&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">R @bainsight &#8211; hooray , welcome to the blue team!  <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> &quot;how&quot; is design, &quot;why&quot; is requirements #baot #prodmgmt</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-611545</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 01:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-611545</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;RT @bainsight: http://bit.ly/bUFw2q ...lately have been shifting from red team to blue and viewing much BA work as design. #baot&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">RT @bainsight: <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> &#8230;lately have been shifting from red team to blue and viewing much BA work as design. #baot</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger L. Cauvin</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-582700</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger L. Cauvin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-582700</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;Welcum 2 the dark side! RT @bainsight: http://bit.ly/bUFw2q Have been shifting from red team to blue &amp; viewing much BA work as design.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Welcum 2 the dark side! RT @bainsight: <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> Have been shifting from red team to blue &amp; viewing much BA work as design.</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Brennan</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-582682</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Brennan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:53:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-582682</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;Old post http://bit.ly/bUFw2q by @sehlhorst...lately have been shifting from red team to blue and viewing much BA work as design. #baot&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Old post <a href="http://bit.ly/bUFw2q" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bUFw2q</a> by @sehlhorst&#8230;lately have been shifting from red team to blue and viewing much BA work as design. #baot</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: José Jesús Pérez A.</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-575392</link>
		<dc:creator>José Jesús Pérez A.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-575392</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;By @sehlhorst: Requirements vs Design – Which is Which and Why? http://bit.ly/2sjlvd&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">By @sehlhorst: Requirements vs Design – Which is Which and Why? <a href="http://bit.ly/2sjlvd" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/2sjlvd</a></span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Babcock</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-575393</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Babcock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-575393</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;@bainsight Thanks for the link, Kevin ( http://twurl.nl/my4sff ). Should have known to look @sehlhorst up on the matter.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">@bainsight Thanks for the link, Kevin ( <a href="http://twurl.nl/my4sff" rel="nofollow">http://twurl.nl/my4sff</a> ). Should have known to look @sehlhorst up on the matter.</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Brennan</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-575394</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Brennan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-575394</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;@dwwright99 Tell that to @rcauvin. ;-) See also @seilhorst at http://twurl.nl/my4sff. My view is close to the &quot;red team&quot;.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">@dwwright99 Tell that to @rcauvin. ;-) See also @seilhorst at <a href="http://twurl.nl/my4sff" rel="nofollow">http://twurl.nl/my4sff</a>. My view is close to the &#8220;red team&#8221;.</span></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-401701</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:08:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-401701</guid>
		<description>Yes Joao, 

You&#039;ve got it exactly right!  Thanks again!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes Joao, </p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got it exactly right!  Thanks again!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: João Pereira</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-397708</link>
		<dc:creator>João Pereira</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-397708</guid>
		<description>Hello Scott, 
Thanks for your answer. I will try to rephrase my question.
Getting the case:
The company C knowns that it paid $20 000 last year of waste, created by the machine M. They want to reduce that waste a minimum of 70%, or save $14 000/year, in a rough calculation, and keep the production ratio planned for that machine for the next 2 years.
The engineering team, starts on analysing the problem and find that the machine is working without producing an average of 1 hour per day, while the machine is being feed. They have gone to the root cause and found that the user has to feed the machine very often during the day, and decide to cut the number of times the user has to feed the machine. But that was not sufficient to meet the @cut 70% of waste@.
They, then, decided to build a system that is be connected to the machine and turn off the machine while not producing, by using sensors and other stuff.

So, in this case we have &quot;cut 70% of waste&quot;, &quot;keep the production ratio planned&quot;, will be the requirements. 
And we also have &quot;reduce number of times the machine is feed&quot;, &quot;turn off the machine while not producing&quot; as design (process design?)
And we also have &quot;system that turn off the machine by using sensors and other stuff&quot; also as design (system design?)

Are those assumptions correct?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Scott,<br />
Thanks for your answer. I will try to rephrase my question.<br />
Getting the case:<br />
The company C knowns that it paid $20 000 last year of waste, created by the machine M. They want to reduce that waste a minimum of 70%, or save $14 000/year, in a rough calculation, and keep the production ratio planned for that machine for the next 2 years.<br />
The engineering team, starts on analysing the problem and find that the machine is working without producing an average of 1 hour per day, while the machine is being feed. They have gone to the root cause and found that the user has to feed the machine very often during the day, and decide to cut the number of times the user has to feed the machine. But that was not sufficient to meet the @cut 70% of waste@.<br />
They, then, decided to build a system that is be connected to the machine and turn off the machine while not producing, by using sensors and other stuff.</p>
<p>So, in this case we have &#8220;cut 70% of waste&#8221;, &#8220;keep the production ratio planned&#8221;, will be the requirements.<br />
And we also have &#8220;reduce number of times the machine is feed&#8221;, &#8220;turn off the machine while not producing&#8221; as design (process design?)<br />
And we also have &#8220;system that turn off the machine by using sensors and other stuff&#8221; also as design (system design?)</p>
<p>Are those assumptions correct?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-394051</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-394051</guid>
		<description>Joao, thanks and welcome to Tyner Blain!  [Sorry, I don&#039;t know how to make the cool a with the ~]

You&#039;ve got it exactly right with your general statements.

You may also have it right with &quot;monitor and control energy&quot;, but I can&#039;t know without knowing the details.  Why do you want to monitor and control the energy?  What benefit do you get from that.  

You could easily argue that the benefit (lower cost, longer operating life, better process control - whatever it is) is more of a requirement, and &quot;monitor and control energy&quot; is more of a design decision (how you design your process to meet the requirement).  Better process control would also force a &quot;why?&quot; question - higher yields?  products that look better (and can garner a higher price in the market)?  faster production?

What does faster production get you?  Higher return on assets?  Reduced cost per unit?  Take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;http://tynerblain.com/blog/2008/05/27/cause-and-effect-diagrams/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Defining Problems with Cause and Effect Diagrams&lt;/a&gt; and see if that helps.

I look forward to hearing more from you - your explanation about the difference between requirements and design is spot-on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joao, thanks and welcome to Tyner Blain!  [Sorry, I don't know how to make the cool a with the ~]</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got it exactly right with your general statements.</p>
<p>You may also have it right with &#8220;monitor and control energy&#8221;, but I can&#8217;t know without knowing the details.  Why do you want to monitor and control the energy?  What benefit do you get from that.  </p>
<p>You could easily argue that the benefit (lower cost, longer operating life, better process control &#8211; whatever it is) is more of a requirement, and &#8220;monitor and control energy&#8221; is more of a design decision (how you design your process to meet the requirement).  Better process control would also force a &#8220;why?&#8221; question &#8211; higher yields?  products that look better (and can garner a higher price in the market)?  faster production?</p>
<p>What does faster production get you?  Higher return on assets?  Reduced cost per unit?  Take a look at <a href="http://tynerblain.com/blog/2008/05/27/cause-and-effect-diagrams/" rel="nofollow">Defining Problems with Cause and Effect Diagrams</a> and see if that helps.</p>
<p>I look forward to hearing more from you &#8211; your explanation about the difference between requirements and design is spot-on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: João Pereira</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-393906</link>
		<dc:creator>João Pereira</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:36:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-393906</guid>
		<description>Hello Scott,

I was looking here to find some hints, and I found this article great. A lot of good resources also.

Yesterday I was asked about the differences between a requirement and a functionality. 

My answer to that question was that a requirement is the &quot;what capability does we need&quot; and for the functionality was &quot;How we implement that capability&quot;. And also pointed that a Requirements is a output of a process called &quot;Requirements Elicitation&quot; whereas Functionality is an output of design and build. 
Let me try to explain. A user want a system X that allow him to perform monitoring and controlling the energy consumption of some machine. Here &quot;Monitor and control the energy...&quot; is a requirement whereas the screens with a dashboard is a functionality to meet that requirement. 

Are my assumption correct, or am I completely wrong?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Scott,</p>
<p>I was looking here to find some hints, and I found this article great. A lot of good resources also.</p>
<p>Yesterday I was asked about the differences between a requirement and a functionality. </p>
<p>My answer to that question was that a requirement is the &#8220;what capability does we need&#8221; and for the functionality was &#8220;How we implement that capability&#8221;. And also pointed that a Requirements is a output of a process called &#8220;Requirements Elicitation&#8221; whereas Functionality is an output of design and build.<br />
Let me try to explain. A user want a system X that allow him to perform monitoring and controlling the energy consumption of some machine. Here &#8220;Monitor and control the energy&#8230;&#8221; is a requirement whereas the screens with a dashboard is a functionality to meet that requirement. </p>
<p>Are my assumption correct, or am I completely wrong?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-68808</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Feb 2007 06:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-68808</guid>
		<description>Hey, thanks Jim, and welcome to Tyner Blain!

Looks like some interesting content - it&#039;s in my feed reader now, looking forward to checking it out.

Scott</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, thanks Jim, and welcome to Tyner Blain!</p>
<p>Looks like some interesting content &#8211; it&#8217;s in my feed reader now, looking forward to checking it out.</p>
<p>Scott</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Morris</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-68765</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Morris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Feb 2007 01:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-68765</guid>
		<description>Great post.

I just came here from this blog.
http://thebusinessanalyst.blogspot.com/

Seems to be talking the same thing.

Requirements and design are two separate areas.

Cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post.</p>
<p>I just came here from this blog.<br />
<a href="http://thebusinessanalyst.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://thebusinessanalyst.blogspot.com/</a></p>
<p>Seems to be talking the same thing.</p>
<p>Requirements and design are two separate areas.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Sehlhorst</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-293</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Sehlhorst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-293</guid>
		<description>Thanks for reading and commenting, Bruce!

Your lockdown idea is a good one - I&#039;ve used it in a &quot;past life&quot; when working on a large engagement.  It is easiest to use when you are either part of the organization (especially if you have some &lt;em&gt;juice&lt;/em&gt;), or as an outsider with a strong reputation and good relationships.  I would caution folks to not try the lockdown approach when they are relatively unknown.  If that&#039;s the case - get a project sponsor within the organization to create the lockdown, and then just facilitate it for them.  If the group is resistant, take some cues from the movie, &lt;em&gt;Twelve Angry Men&lt;/em&gt;, and be the jury foreman.  Create an association of &quot;we all have the same goal&quot; - not - &quot;You must tell me&quot;.

Getting to &#039;right&#039; not &#039;perfect&#039; is another great piece of advice.

Keep sharing your thoughts with us!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for reading and commenting, Bruce!</p>
<p>Your lockdown idea is a good one &#8211; I&#8217;ve used it in a &#8220;past life&#8221; when working on a large engagement.  It is easiest to use when you are either part of the organization (especially if you have some <em>juice</em>), or as an outsider with a strong reputation and good relationships.  I would caution folks to not try the lockdown approach when they are relatively unknown.  If that&#8217;s the case &#8211; get a project sponsor within the organization to create the lockdown, and then just facilitate it for them.  If the group is resistant, take some cues from the movie, <em>Twelve Angry Men</em>, and be the jury foreman.  Create an association of &#8220;we all have the same goal&#8221; &#8211; not &#8211; &#8220;You must tell me&#8221;.</p>
<p>Getting to &#8216;right&#8217; not &#8216;perfect&#8217; is another great piece of advice.</p>
<p>Keep sharing your thoughts with us!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Altmann</title>
		<link>http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-290</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Altmann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:29:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tynerblain.com/blog/2006/02/11/requirements-vs-design-which-is-which-and-why/#comment-290</guid>
		<description>Agree that known business constraints are requirements. 

Depends on Product process in a product company versus new business application inside an a company working with IT.

Mock up screens normally come into play for the end user experience. In your article these would be design. But the reality is that humans normally have a picture in mind (expectations). And expectation mgmt is key to any product/project.

My guidance for function requirements within a company with IT: If the product/businss application has a road map - write down everyhting you are willing to pay for (whether it is ver 1, or ver 2, or ver3) - as design for ver 1.0 must not limit ver 2or3. 
Items where you need an impact analysis (can not determine until we get more information from design pass ) are clearly handled in DESIGN.

The line does blur inside large companies when dealing with learge business units.

Another item - requirements gathering has a tendancy to go on forever. If the group is no skill at requirements (and most businss units are not) change tactices. Get them in a room for a week. And force a lock down deadline. The document can and will change - but as long as you have address or identifed all reasonable issues that could inmpact scope/timeline - you must force them to a &quot;its right not perfect&quot; point - and then handle all future changes via formal change control in the mgmt reviews.

This one is alsways tough in business unit customers. For a Product Mgr at a product company, the line somewhat easier to handle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree that known business constraints are requirements. </p>
<p>Depends on Product process in a product company versus new business application inside an a company working with IT.</p>
<p>Mock up screens normally come into play for the end user experience. In your article these would be design. But the reality is that humans normally have a picture in mind (expectations). And expectation mgmt is key to any product/project.</p>
<p>My guidance for function requirements within a company with IT: If the product/businss application has a road map &#8211; write down everyhting you are willing to pay for (whether it is ver 1, or ver 2, or ver3) &#8211; as design for ver 1.0 must not limit ver 2or3.<br />
Items where you need an impact analysis (can not determine until we get more information from design pass ) are clearly handled in DESIGN.</p>
<p>The line does blur inside large companies when dealing with learge business units.</p>
<p>Another item &#8211; requirements gathering has a tendancy to go on forever. If the group is no skill at requirements (and most businss units are not) change tactices. Get them in a room for a week. And force a lock down deadline. The document can and will change &#8211; but as long as you have address or identifed all reasonable issues that could inmpact scope/timeline &#8211; you must force them to a &#8220;its right not perfect&#8221; point &#8211; and then handle all future changes via formal change control in the mgmt reviews.</p>
<p>This one is alsways tough in business unit customers. For a Product Mgr at a product company, the line somewhat easier to handle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

