Skip to main content

"Delivering Product"

In a previous entry, I mentioned that, when you use an agile product development process, you deliver "a working version of the product for review" at the end of each iteration. I mentioned in a later entry that Alistair Cockburn criticizes organizations that claim to use agile methods but don't deliver product at the end of their so-called iterations.

What does it mean to deliver a working version of your product to customers? What is the point of iterating if you "deliver product" after the first iteration?

The crux of the matter is that you should be able to demonstrate at the end of an iteration how a customer would use your product to address customer problems. So "working version" doesn't mean one that is ready for sale to the customer, but just one that is ready for demonstration. For a software product, that demonstration might include showing some hard-coded mock-ups in place of screens developers haven't yet implemented.

Comments

Scott Sehlhorst said…
The key here is that you deliver something which enables learning. That could be product to customers, betas or prototypes to select customers, or something to stakeholders.

Regardless, the litmus test is - did you learn something which caused you to change what you're doing (or how you're doing it)?
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Exactly. Learning and nimble adjustments based on what's learned.

As I mentioned in the previous blog entry, Agile Product Management developers can learn from discoveries during design and implementation. Perhaps more importantly, product managers can discover requirements they hadn't previously considered (particularly requirements corresponding to problems to avoid, not just problems to solve).

This learning can take place regardless of whether we deliver the product to internal or external stakeholders. The feedback or behavior of external stakeholders that are actual target users can in many cases be more reliable. But it's not always necessary.

With lean startup methods, we cast a wider net: a learning loop that encompasses the entire product strategy (including marketing and sales).

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

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

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