RE: [agile-usability] Re: are you making efficient designs?
> > But you have to be able to justify (to yourself and toIn my own experience, working on stuff that is directly relevant to the
> managers) why
> > that detour SEEMS like the shortest route to a deployed
> useful system
> > (which is usually the end goal).
> > [My emphasis]
> The "seems" is the important bit. "Seems" means we could be wrong.
> The chance of being wrong suggests buying insurance: spending
> money to turn a possibly big cost into a manageable one.
> Investing in the team (its knowledge, etc.) is insurance,
> even if whatever you're buying has no predictable realized value.
business goals provides me with ample opportunity to learn new and
When I first heard about XP, I had a strong intuition that it would
allow me to get to useful deployed systems faster and more safely, so I
invested time into learning it. Note that at the time, it was just
that... An intuition. It could have been wrong (it wasn't), so I didn't
just go away on XP training for 3 months. Instead, I learned a little
bit, tried it on my projects, then learned a bit more, etc... But all
the while, I was always applying what I learned to those tasks which in
my current best guess were moving me fastests towards impacting the
bottom line business goals.
In contrast, I always feel like I SHOULD know how to build a MySQL DB (I
feel embarassed whenever I confess I don't know anything about SQL DBs).
But I haven't done anything about it, because I have not yet been in a
situation where it felt like learning MySQL would move me faster towards
a deployed useful system. Not the kind of systems I work on anyways.
> Or: consider current golden boy Apple. Look at the iPod. IsVery few companies have enough "play money" to invest in "generic,
> it the case that somewhere back in time, some person
> justified the shuffle feature by saying, "Just wait - when
> keychain drives get cheap enough, we'll be able to exploit
> this feature to sell a teensy music product without any way
> to select music?" Or was it the case that someone realized
> what unplanned-for potential meant when the time was right?
> If the latter, was there not realized (but not guaranteed)
> business value from investing in a sort of generic, fuzzy,
> and unquantifiable potential within the product and organization?
fuzzy, and unquantifiable potential". Of course, Apple did just that
from day one, even when they were a garage startup. But that's one
company that succeeded (albeit big time) with that approach. It's not
hard to find thouasands of dot com startups who failed miserably with
- On 2/23/07, Robert Hoekman, Jr. <rhoekmanjr@...> wrote:
> Without any hard feelings intended, the best thing I could do here is to simplyI just got back from another planet, it seems, so pardon me for asking
> stop engaging in this conversation. I'm sorry if this bothers you, but this list is
> simply not what I hoped it would be, and I believe I need to explore my
> interests elsewhere.
dumb questions, but what *did* you expect? I myself do a lot of agile
UX (note, small 'a'; there is no Agile) and I'm on this list, so I'm
curious about your "Great Wall of Agile on this list"; what is it?
Sure, a lot of people have *their* meaning of Agile and their way of
doing things, and as you say, that's ok. Do you feel some people
advocate only one way of Agile, perhaps a tad too much? That their
passion is getting in the way of pragmatism?
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchymist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------