Software product success.
Background:
In our previous post, Sample use case examples, we created two informal use cases. The use cases were written to support product requirements defined as part of a project to reduce test suite maintenace costs. In this post, we will define functional requirements that support these use cases. This process is an example of using structured requirements, applied to a small real world project.
We talked about informal use cases a while ago in our use case series. Over a series of posts, we are demonstrating the process of defining a software product. The next step, and subject of this post, is the creation of informal use cases to support the defined goals for the software.
A real world example of converting from an MRD to a PRD. This is the process of translating from a market-requirements view of the product to a product-requirements view of the product.
This is the second in a three-part post about using tags as a means to organize an automated test suite.
Part 2 of this post can be read as a standalone article. If it were, it would be titled Top five problems with test automation suites. If you’re only reading this post and not parts 1 and 3, pretend that this is the title.
This post is a follow-up to our previous case study on incorporating unit testing into an existing team’s development environment. The case study is based on a real solution that has already started reaping rewards for our client, and is gaining momentum. We’re now looking at making it easier for the development team to maintain this test suite, and proposing some extensions – including a form of tagging.
We’ve talked repeatedly about using ROI to drive prioritization of requirements based upon value. ROI can be used as the basis for prioritization for all decision making.
If we fail to take risk into account, our calculations will certainly be wrong, and we may make a poor decision. When we talk about accounting for risk in this context, we mean that we are accounting for the unlikely, undesired, or unintentional outcomes. We use the term expected value to refer to the risk adjusted approximation of the outcome. In financial circles, this is also called discounting.
The most common mistake people make when calculating ROI is failing to take into account the expected value of the return or the expected value of the cost of a project.
We received a comment from Tom Humbarger at iRise on an earlier post, which led us to take a look at their site. iRise provides a tool for rapid prototyping of web-based applications, and there’s an overview of the products available. They have iRise Studio which allows people to create […]
http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-20060129.html We won’t copy the image of the cartoon – but we’ll tell you that it opens with Alice: “I’ll need to know your requirements before I start to design the software.” ObRelatedTopic: How to interview when gathering requirements Great Dilbert products The latest book (Nov 2005) from Scott Adams, […]
Joy posted a really good article last week at Seilevel’s requirements defined blog, Measuring product manager performance on internal system products. Her post is a followup to an extensive and heated debate that happened last fall on the Austin PMM forum. It’s a great forum to subscribe to – a […]