Skip to content

June 18, 2014

Article: Eliciting Vision through Exercises and Games

The process of developing detailed requirements – or even a well-articulated vision – can be an excruciating process without the right facilitation techniques.  In a broken process the person gathering requirements doesn’t know what to ask and those who want the solution have a hard time articulating what they want and need because they don’t know how to share their thoughts with someone from the outside.

Facilitating a discussion takes skill and curiosity, however, in many cases that’s not enough to convey the richness of the desires of those who want the solution.  What’s needed is a framework for success.  Forming a framework based on the learnings of knowledge management for the last 20 years and instructional design of the last 50 or so years creates opportunities to gather requirements and vision more quickly and with greater vibrancy.

Fish and Water

If fish could talk and you asked them what water was like, how might they answer?  They’d probably answer the same way we’d answer about air.  “It’s the stuff you’re in.” Or perhaps, “It’s always there.”  Because fish have never known anything different, it would be hard for them to articulate an alternative reality.  Likewise, if a fish were trying to describe the properties of a house, it’s unlikely that they’d mention that it has to be something that will stay together in water – because from the point of view of the fish that is obvious.

This is the fundamental challenge of eliciting vision and requirements.  When you’re “in it” you can’t see it.  It’s up to the person gathering requirements to create an opportunity for the person with the knowledge and vision to get outside of their environment and their standard ways of thinking long enough to be able to communicate the obvious.

Read more…

Article: Eliminate Costly User Experience Mistakes

Far too many web site design projects are plagued by continuous changes to mockups, or changes to the user experience after it’s already been implemented. While seemingly inevitable, these changes are both costly and unnecessary.  Leveraging a staged approach to development of the user experience can reduce costs, frustrations, and time.

The process revolves around the idea that you move from the least specific to the most specific user interface while covering both the static – what people see – and the dynamic – how they interact.  The process outlined below is designed to continuously elicit requirements and improve understanding earlier in the process – with less investment.

Projects that attempt to skip the steps outlined here often go directly to the mockup step and end up in countless iterations because there’s a lack of clarity about what the end goals are.  This lack of clarity makes the mockup the virtual dog chew toy, as one group struggles to move the mockup closer to their vision.  Ultimately, another group sees the move as moving away from their vision and they attempt to pull it back.  By progressing through a rational design approach, the unnecessary work of continuing to develop iteration after iteration can be eliminated.

Read More…

Article: Setting Goals with Conflicting Stakeholders

Getting everyone to agree on goals is a challenging undertaking in any organization.  Different stakeholders necessarily have different concerns and perspectives.  Those differences lead to a desire to have different goals for a project, an initiative, or an organization.  Getting everyone to understand those diverse perspectives and interlocking constraints is never easy; however, there is a technique which makes the process easier.  The technique of Dialogue Mapping creates an opportunity to reach a shared understanding of a wicked problem.  Many organizations face wicked problems – even if they aren’t aware of the problem’s wickedness.

Achieving shared understanding through the process of Dialogue Mapping leads to the opportunity to develop an approach to change the problem.  This is the heart of setting goals as a team – developing a shared understanding of the problem and developing a set of goals from that shared understanding.

Wicked Problems

Horst Rittel first used the term wicked problems to discuss problems that have a set of interlocking constraints and have no stopping rule.  There’s only better and worse – there is no right and wrong.  His experience was urban planning, where you can’t test the impact of a change without doing the change.  You can’t really see how a new road will impact a community until you build it and once you’ve built it you can’t un-build a road easily.

Wicked problems are really very large systems or, more accurately, sets of interconnected systems that operate together.  Because of the complexity, there’s no straightforward way to view the problem or to design a solution without the risk of introducing unintended side effects.

Read more…

Recent Posts

Public Speaking