Length
2 min read
These two principles are often integral to human-centered agile projects. The former prioritises designing for users’ needs, while the latter focuses on delivering valuable products and services to them as quick as possible. Sounds straightforward, right?
Well, it depends – as any good consultant would tell you.
Individually, each principle works effectively within its domain, supported by ample evidence and experience. However, let’s consider how the answer to the initial question might change when applied to a recent development project.
Let me share some insights into one of our latest projects: the design and delivery of a new digital platform. This endeavour was complex and multidisciplinary, involving multiple organisations, entities, and stakeholders over several years. To navigate uncertainties and facilitate rapid development for user testing, we embraced an agile framework.
Each team member was required to manage a multitude of files, knowledge, information, and decisions, whilst keeping focus on the principle of “working software rather than comprehensive documentation.” However, as the project progressed and the volume of design, features and user stories increased, we found ourselves relying heavily on each other’s memory to collaborate. Relying only on memory instead of adopting accessible documentation support appears to violate Nielsen’s heuristics.
It is evident that human memory is flawed, as demonstrated by various sources ranging from common knowledge to scientific research in diverse fields such as psychology, cognitive sciences, legal affairs, and medicine. All extensively discuss the limitations of human memory and its impact on knowledge reliability.
So, what was our solution? Did we choose a heavyweight documentation system? Quite the opposite. We opted for a more human-centred approach: a lightweight, traceability method based on hyperlinks, versioning, and a naming convention, easily integrated into the project backlog and repository. As we applied it countless times in crafting user experience for products and services, we left behind breadcrumbs of meaningful clues to bolster the memory of team members. This simple documentation-driven method had significant impacts on both the team and the project itself.
To highlight the main advantages, the implementation of this traceability system offered:
- Streamlined communication: team members can access a centralised source of truth, ensuring alignment and coherence among all,
- Quick change integration: team members can smoothly integrate updates thanks to the access to the most recent design documentation and all pertinent changes,
- Safeguarding of the user experience: assuring the reliability of the design requirements preserves the design-driven process and user-centricity,
- Mitigation of misunderstandings: team members can retrieve and manage dependable information at any time, averting potential confusion.
The proposed lightweight traceability process for design documentation can also be effectively applied to projects that follow process-driven, safety-driven, or regulated approaches, ensuring compliance with quality, safety, and regulatory requirements.
By addressing these challenges with an easy but effective documentation-driven solution, we were able to ensure design-driven software quality, while staying true to agile principles.
