Requirements in Agile Scrum Methodology

April 28th, 2009

reqwritten by gunther gerlach-2009

: are in fact such a clear description of a feature, and the fact that each could stand alone. They made it really easy to move cards representing the around the

 

As a difference between this methodology from the others is that teams capture requirements at a high level only, just-in-time for each feature to be developed. methodology requirements are ideally visual and should be barely sufficient, i.e. the absolute minimum required to enable development and testing to proceed with reasonable efficiency. The rationale for this is to minimise the time spent on anything that doesn’t actually form part of the end product.

Although Development is much more flexible than more traditional development methodologies,  Development does nevertheless have quite a bit of rigour and is based on the fairly structured approach of lean manufacturing as pioneered by Toyota.

This flexibility allows the business to introduce changes until the very end of the project almost with no impact on the entire process.

 

Any requirements captured at the outset should be captured at a high level and in a visual format, perhaps for example as a storyboard of the user interface. At this stage, requirements should be understood enough to determine the outline scope of the product and produce high level budgetary estimates and no more. Ideally,  Development teams capture these high level requirements in workshops, working together in a highly collaborative way so that all team members understand the requirements as well as each other. It is not necessarily the remit of one person, like the Business Analyst in more traditional projects, to gather the requirements independently and write them all down; it’s a joint activity of the team that allows everyone to contribute, challenge and understand what’s needed. And just as importantly, why.

 

XP (eXtreme Programming) breaks requirements down into small bite-size pieces called . These are fundamentally similar to but are lightweight and more simplistic in their nature. An team (including a key user or product owner from the business) visualises requirements in whiteboarding sessions and creates storyboards (sequences of screen shots, visuals, sketches or wireframes) to show roughly how the solution will look and how the user’s interaction will flow in the solution. There is no lengthy requirements document or specification unless there is an area of complexity that really warrants it. Otherwise the storyboards are just annotated and only where necessary.

A common approach amongst teams is to represent each requirement, use case or user story, on a card and use a T-card system to allow stories to be moved around easily as the user/business representative on the project adjusts priorities. Requirements are broken down into very small pieces in order to achieve this; and actually the fact it’s going on a card forces it to be broken down small. The advantage this has over lengthy documentation is that it’s extremely visual and tangible; you can stand around the T-card system and whiteboard discussing progress, issues and priorities.

The timeframe of an is fixed, whereas the features are variable. Should it be necessary to change priority or add new requirements into the project, the user/business representative physically has to remove a comparable amount of work from scope before they can place the new card into the project.

This is a big contrast to a common situation where the business owner sends numerous new and changed requirements by email and/or verbally, somehow expecting the new and existing features to still be delivered in the original timeframes. Traditional project teams that don’t control changes can end up with the dreaded scope creep, one of the most common reasons for software development projects to fail.

Agile teams, by contrast, accept change; in fact they expect it. But they manage change by fixing the timescales and trading-off features. Cards can of course be backed up by documentation as appropriate, but always the principle of is to document the bare minimum amount of information that will allow a feature to be developed, and always broken down into very small units.

Using the Scrum agile management practice, requirements (or features or stories, whatever language you prefer to use) are broken down into tasks of no more than 16 hours (i.e. 2 working days) and preferably no more than 8 hours, so progress can be measured objectively on a daily basis.

 

Gunther Gerlach

  1. Truden
    September 20th, 2010 at 18:48 | #1

    Greatings, ЎIncreнble! No estб claro para mн, їcуmo offen que la actualizaciуn de su nombre de http://www.gunthergerlach.com.

    Truden

  2. September 4th, 2011 at 03:20 | #2

    I really like your blog, keep it up!

  3. September 7th, 2011 at 01:17 | #3

    Hi, buzz me if you want to discuss this further!

  1. No trackbacks yet.