Saturday, August 18, 2007
My Seilevel requirements discussion posts
I feel the need, one day, to integrate the ideas in my posts to the Seilevel forum. Until that day arrives, my contributions can be found by following the link.
Weinberg on Writing: Breaking the Reader Trance
Weinberg on Writing: Breaking the Reader Trance
This helped crystallise some thinking on the question of the true or false dichotomy between the role of stakeholder and user. See: Breaking the Stakeholder Trance
Friday, August 17, 2007
Weinberg on Writing: Writers' delusions
Weinberg on Writing: Writers' delusions
If Jerry says readi it, you'd better read it!
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Requirement Questions
My original post to the Portland Pattern Repository appears to have emerged unscathed (as at the date of this post). Comments here or there much appreciated, of course.
What are the benefits of meeting the requirement (or the consequences of not meeting it)? [Value]
Is the purpose of a required feature documented? [Purpose]
Who is accountable for the organisation's achievement of the stated purpose? [Owner]
How might the extent to which the requirement is met be ascertained? [Measure]
Who is interested in the extent to which the requirement is met? [Stakeholder]
What is the business context within which the requirement should be met? [Context]
Within what timescales should the requirement be met? [Timing]
What risks are associated with the requirement? [Risk]
Does the requirement have a single purpose? [Atomicity]
What is the immediate 'parent' requirement? [Parent]
Does meeting all the 'child' requirements equate to meeting the requirement itself? [Complete]
With what other requirements does the requirement conflict? [Conflict]
What requirements (other than its parent) does the requirement support? [Support]
What are the underlying assumptions? [Assume]
Why has the requirement been documented? [Motive]
Stakeholder Value Trade-offs
I've been thinking quite a bit recently about "knowing when to stop" or, at least, pause. My Seilevel post (title link) addresses this in a particular context from a theoretical perspective, and also suggests that practice differs from theory.
My current thinking is that this sort of low-level decision is a stakeholder value trade-off even though it is rarely treated that way in practice. Stakeholder value trade-offs are a special case of value decision or what I call value decision deltas.
In this context, a "delta" is a change rather than a dendritic multifurcation. The connotations of the latter, and the implication from calculus in the former of infinitesimal changes have influenced my settling on this term.
I have written an elucidation of the following, but for the time being, let it stand on its own many feet:The level of “decidedness” is optimal (for the time being) when all positive and negative decision deltas have non-positive risk-adjusted net stakeholder value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)