Re: [agile-usability] Re: Orthodox View of Agile
- On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Anders Ramsay <andersr@...> wrote:
> I think the operative terms are 'running' and 'tested' - i.e. unlessSure. Something we want to "done" but have not "done" is "done debt".
> the code is debugged/passes all tests and delivers a feature/flow the
> Team/PO considers Done, it remains in the Debt column.
Why does non-code automatically accrue *additional* debt?
Also, why does done-ness have a binary result (done/not done) instead
of a range of values (not done, functional but not usable, usable, a
good experience, an awesome experience).
(In all my experience done/not done has always really meant some
*degree* of done-ness the team has agreed will suffice.)
- Hi William,
A somewhat belated reply :-)
On 17 Sep 2009, at 01:48, William Pietri wrote:
> Adrian Howard wrote:
>>> Given that, it's not shocking to me that there's still a gap. A
>>> lot of
>>> designers don't yet see the value in feedback-driven approaches,
>>> and a
>>> lot of agile developers are frustrated with their experiences with
>>> designers. But I have full faith that we'll work this out
>> I can't think of any "design" group or individual who's vaguely
>> competent - agile or not - that doesn't have a whole bunch of
>> feedback/ iteration in their process. Maybe not feedback with end
>> users. Often not feedback via code. But certainly feedback from
>> clients, peers, comparison with alternate designs, etc.
>> The problem, in my experience, is a wall between the pre-story
>> iterations/feedback-loops done by the "designers" and the post-
>> story iterations/feedback-loops done by the "developers".
> Sorry I wasn't clear here. When I said "feedback-driven" I'm
> thinking of things that close the outer feedback loops. I think (and
> I imagine you do as well) the other feedback you describe is only
> useful to the extent it serves as a lower-cost proxy for the the
> real thing. Since even sketching things out in a room alone is
> feedback-driven, clearly I need a better term for what I mean.
Jared Spool has an interesting breakdown of design approaches that you
might find of interest.
by his categories I think you'd be talking about people doing "self
design" and "genius design".