Re: [agile-usability] Re: Don Norman on Agile Development
- Interesting thread. I am glad that this view is starting to be taken by thought leaders in the U* community. I hope this quote gets widely circulated.I know that in companies where U* is important, the UX component is often iterative, but the implementation is waterfall (over the wall). This situation leads to all the many failure modes of waterfall, including:
If the UX is perfect is the system is implementable? For example, in one case, the UX design for a reservation system called for non-smoking to specified as a room filter, but that data was not available at that stage from the database. This is a small example but this kind of issue occurred very often.Agile is delivering working systems much much more effectively, and with time to market that is 1/3 that of conventional projects. This ROI means there is a much heavier business driver to use Agile over UX. Getting UX in the door is a key passion for me, but as a complement to, not at the expense of agile methods.cheers,Robin Dymond
- Too long, too much time and $$ spent in design, resulting in reduced, or in some cases no functionality being released.
- Design that is not implementable, or has major flaws in logic.
- Missed requirements
- Difficulty accommodating change as the team and customer learn about their needs
- Emphasis on Project artifacts (requirements, user flows, photoshop) instead of working
- Developers on a death march to build the system
- Testers with literally no time to test
- Poor quality code released into production
- Angry customers
- Systems that don't meet the business needs of the customer