Hardware versus Software

Some hardware producers believe that, while agile methods are important for developing software products, they do not apply to hardware products. In my view, agile methods benefit development of all types of products.

As I mentioned in a previous entry, the benefit of agile development is that you build into your process an efficient means of dealing with mistakes and discoveries that inevitably transpire. You discover requirements you hadn't considered. You find inadequacies in the design. You want to make these discoveries as early as possible in the development process. Iterating on the product development tends to minimize the amount of time it takes to discover problems and inadequacies and recover from them.

Why might agile processes not work for hardware development? In some cases, the cost of a hardware development iteration is much higher than that of a software development iteration. In software, your development staff simply updates code in each iteration. Code costs nothing but the time to write it. The equipment in hardware, on the other hand, costs money above and beyond the time to fabricate and piece it together. If you iterate too much, these costs will add up and exceed the savings you derive from discovering, and adjusting to, mistakes earlier in development.

The cost of iterating clearly does impact the wisdom of using agile methods. However, only in extreme cases does it ever render agile methods inferior to waterfall methods. Furthermore, organizations with no experience with agile methods tend to overlook the many creative ways they can iterate at a low cost. This myopia tends to bias them against agile methods.

Comments

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Interaction Design: the Neglected Skill

Your product development organization has a big, gaping hole in it. (Be prepared to feel defensive as you continue reading.) One of the most important roles in product development is the role of interaction designer. An interaction designer designs how the users will interact with the product and conceptualize the tasks they perform. He decides whether, for example, the user interface will be command driven, object oriented (clicking on objects then specifying what to do with them), or wizard based. The interaction designer decides the individual steps in the use cases. Every company has one or more people that play the interaction designer role. Usually, those people have little or no expertise in interaction design. Sadly, they typically don't even realize how unqualified they are. Let's see who typically plays the role at companies. Engineer . An engineer is an expert on building what is designed. Yes, an engineer may know how to design the internal structure of the hardware

Stop Validating and Start Falsifying

The product management and startup worlds are buzzing about the importance of "validation". In this entry, I'll explain how this idea originated and why it's leading organizations astray. Why Validate? In lean startup circles, you constantly hear about "validated learning" and "validating" product ideas: The assumption is that you have a great product idea and seek validation from customers before expending vast resources to build and bring it to market. Indeed, it makes sense to transcend conventional approaches to making product decisions . Intuition, sales anecdotes, feature requests from customers, backward industry thinking, and spreadsheets don't form the basis for sound product decisions. Incorporating lean startup concepts , and a more scientific approach to learning markets, is undoubtedly a sounder approach. Moreover, in larger organizations, sometimes further in the product life-cycle, everyone seems to have an opinio

Cauvin

Search This Blog