Skip to main content

What is an Iteration?

Cote included among his recent del.icio.us links an article by Alistair Cockburn on iterative development.

The crux of the issue Cockburn raises is that "[d]anger grows when the results of [an] iteration are not directly linked to delivering the product to the end user."

To realize the benefits of iterative development, your iteration cannot simply be a development time period that culminates in testing and refinement of the plan for continuing development of the product. An iteration must result in a working release of the product to an end user. I have made this point in the past:
"With iterations, you perform the steps to yield a working version of the product for review."
That is, the tests you run shouldn't just determine whether isolated features or pieces of the product work, but whether the end-to-end processes users perform are working.

Why is it so important for iterations to yield a working, releasable product? One reason I've mentioned:
"Implementing the product and demonstrating it to prospective customers almost always results in the discovery of new requirements or the recognition of errors in the original requirements."
Another reason is that it prevents product developers from getting side-tracked. A developer might, for example, get bogged down implementing a particular feature. What's important, however, is not the feature itself, but what requirement it was intended to satisfy. If the developer is focused on satisfying the requirement instead of implementing the feature, she may (acting with "agility") simply choose to ditch the feature and satisfy the requirement by different means.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the