Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [agile-usability] Valuing stories

Expand Messages
  • George Dinwiddie
    ... I take that as a clue that we should think twice about doing things that don t deliver value to the people we re trying to serve. Maybe we re not thinking
    Message 1 of 53 , Sep 7, 2009
      Hugh Beyer wrote:
      > William: I encourage people not to account for all those other tasks...
      > My default position is that teams should only count things when they
      > deliver value to the people we're trying to serve.
      >
      > I'm allergic to doing work with no way to account for it. It screws
      > up your velocity in the first place, and work you're not tracking is
      > work you don't care about in the second. I'd rather keep the story as
      > the unit of user value and track tasks to implement the story which
      > may well include non-software tasks.

      I take that as a clue that we should think twice about doing things that
      don't deliver value to the people we're trying to serve. Maybe we're
      not thinking of all the people we serve. Or maybe we're doing too much
      busywork.

      Take wireframes, for example. I've seen UE people spend days and days
      on them. Then revise them all over again for several more days. Did
      they need to do that much? Could they do fewer wireframes to discuss
      the design? Could they do them for parts of the screen, so a change in
      one area doesn't require editing all the wireframes? Could they do some
      of the mockups with paper & pen? Or sitting with a developer in HTML?

      - George

      --
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
      Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
      Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    • Adrian Howard
      ... I think that they re probably an orthogonal dimensions myself. I ve met people who make very good decisions about the design of the code/ ux - but are not
      Message 53 of 53 , Sep 11, 2009
        On 6 Sep 2009, at 21:27, Hassan Schroeder wrote:

        > On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:31 PM, William Pietri<william@...>
        > wrote:
        >
        >> .... In fact, teams are doing design all the time. The choice
        >> isn't between designing and not designing; it's between designing
        >> well
        >> and designing poorly.
        >
        > Or between designing consciously and designing unconsciously,
        > the latter being fairly close to "not designing" :-)


        I think that they're probably an orthogonal dimensions myself. I've
        met people who make very good decisions about the design of the code/
        ux - but are not really able to articulate the reasoning behind them
        very well.

        This can be problematical since their decisions can sound arbitrary to
        others - even when they're really good decisions.

        Cheers,

        Adrian

        --
        http://quietstars.com - twitter.com/adrianh - delicious.com/adrianh
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.