Software product success.
Why do we write use cases? For the same reasons that our users use our software – to achieve a goal. In our case, we want to assure that we are creating the right software. By looking at this goal in more detail, we can make decisions that drive the best possible use case creation. Lets apply our product management skills to writing better use cases by writing an MRD for use cases
Gartner reported that companies spent $3.7 Billion USD on application development tools in 2004, with a 5% annual growth rate. The Standish Group has shown that 40% to 60% of project failures are due to requirements failures. At least 1/3 of the money spent on getting more efficient at coding is being wasted – it should be spent on writing the right software.
For organizations that don’t already appreciate the value of product management, just trying to explain the role can be very challenging. Usually the “strategic product management” responsibilities are distributed throughout the org. Convincing them that a single person should be a product manager (and not also a marketer, project manager, or designer) is like convincing them to eat gum off a fork.
The Wall Street Journal apparently wrote a critique of brainstorming that questions its value. Bob Sutton (professor, author, etc) responds with an entertaining read. Prof. Sutton critiques the data analysis, the experiment execution, and the people involved. Seems the WSJ messed up on everything except the topic.
*(scroll to the bottom and come back) Guerilla Product Management (pdf) is an article available from Sequent Learning Networks, written by Steven Haines. (Hat tip to brainmates for finding it) Steven’s pdf includes 17 golden rules for achieving product management success(no, we won’t do 17 articles on each of them). […]
One of the ten big rules of writing a good MRD is writing passionate requirements. What in the world is a passionate requirement [they were all wondering]? When you believe in the product, are committed to the work, and aren’t bored, you can write passionately. The goal of a requirement is to create sustained understanding. A dry document can create understanding, but an engaging document will sustain it.
One of the ten big rules of writing a good MRD is writing atomic requirements. Just as verifiable requirements must be concretely measurable as having been met or not, so must atomic requirements. If a requirement has multiple elements that can be implemented separately, it is not atomic.
One of the ten big rules of writing a good MRD is writing verifiable requirements. Verification is both a function of having a precise goal, and having the ability to affordably measure the requirement. A precise goal is a verifiable requirement if we can clearly answer “yes” or “no” when asked if the requirement has been implemented. We also face the practical realities of being able to measure the results profitably.
One of the ten big rules of writing a good MRD is writing unambiguous requirements. Ambiguity is a function of communication. The writing can be generically ambiguous, or ambiguous to the writer. A requirement could be precise in intent, but ambiguous in interpretation by the reader. Understanding our audience is as important as precision in language. We write unambiguous requirements because misinterpretation of requirements is the source of 40% of all bugs in delivered software.