This post by Rich Mironov resonated with me even more than usual
(if you don't regularly read his stuff, you should!). Rich describes a practice
involving placing completed user stories in the following buckets to get
insight on how you're really spending your development dollars (and
thus getting insight into your strategy, even if it's implicit):
·
Planned features
·
Unplanned features
·
Quality and development
infrastructure
·
Longer-term research
Rich's post reminded me of a similar practice I've had of
categorizing proposed investments in a release. He's right on with the a
pie chart or similar graphic being much more useful in communicating the
insights gained.
Before I describe my practice, I have to be forthright about how
I've typically done release planning during most of career. Because I've worked
at big/huge primarily B2B shops with (probably) overdeveloped portfolio
processes, we were always forced to consider the likely scope of a given
release long before we started development. While such a practice is clearly
not in vogue in a software development world dominated by Agile/Lean thinking,
because of intra-portfolio dependencies, expectations of big customers (some of
the biggest companies in the world) and staunch competition for development
resources, we simply couldn't tell our stakeholders "We can't tell you yet
what we'll deliver". In my experience in these big shops, Agile/Scrum was
used as a mechanism to allow deviation from these plans as necessary, but
didn't preclude our defining our intentions relative to a release before we
began building it.
BTW, Rich's approach suggests calculating story points for
completed stories/features/epics to determine proportional investment. In terms
of release planning, our metric was always development capacity expressed as
person-days, one of the key goals of release planning being to convince
ourselves that we had a reasonable fit between planned investments and
available development capacity (and setting the stage for requesting additional resources as needed).
Here are a few interesting pivots that I would assume could drive
insight into investments we've already made (or "implicit strategy"
to use Rich's terminology) as well as planned investments. Once again, I
realize people who have drunk deeply from the Agile Kook-aid pitcher will balk
at the idea of this level of detailed planning before development begins, but,
what can I say? It's an imperfect world and we were doing the best we could in
sometimes very un-Agile organizations.
Kano model
The Kano model was the original inspiration for generating simple
analytics based on investment categorization. We had launched a new product
that had barely made it out the door. Suffice it to say none of us were
thrilled with the final scope nor the level of quality. At "power vendors",
the truth is that it is assumed that you'll get it "right" on the
third release, but that's fodder for another post. Anyway, as we planned the
next release, we quickly realized that just fixing perceived gaps and
addressing very real quality issues would consume all development capacity.
When we considered the press release for V2, we realized we had virtually
nothing in the release to generate excitement.
This quick exercise can help you determine if your release has enough sizzle to get customers' and analysts' attention when you launch.
Customers we have vs. customers we want
Another way to categorize investments involves considering if the
investment is likely to please the customer segments you have or represents an
investment to acquire customers in new segments. Although the line isn't always
clear, try categorizing your investments based on who you think they'll most
resonate with:
·
Existing Segments
·
New Segments
·
Both
·
Indifferent (overcoming
technical debt etc.)
Products at the beginning and end of their life cycles often must
attract new customer segments, often with features that may not be particularly
valuable to their installed base. If you're not investing in attracting new
customer segments, ask yourself why not. This categorization also gives you
insight into to proportion of your investment that is going toward things that
please no customer whatsoever. I've been involved in releases when this
"bucket" consumed 80% or more of our development calories.
Stakeholders
Categorizing your investments by stakeholder can also be an
interesting exercise. While it's natural to focus on customers, the truth is
that we product managers must often please multiple masters. Here are some
typical stakeholder categories:
·
Customers (consider
decomposing this one based on segments as well)
·
Partners
·
Management (investment in
quality initiatives, portfolio interoperability etc.)
·
Product standards
compliance(accessibility, supportability etc.)
·
Sales (to close some
critical deals, for example)
This exercise should also make it fairly easy to see how much of
your investment is intended to please internal vs. external stakeholders (in
big shops, you internal stakeholders my consume a significant number of
calories).
Conclusion
So there you have it, a few ways to categorize investments you
intend to make to get insight into priorities and possibly make adjustments
before development starts. Do you do similar categorization?
No comments:
Post a Comment