Skip to main content

Innovation Games Class in Austin

Innovation and agilist extraordinare, Luke Hohmann, will be teaching a two-day class on innovation games in Austin.

I have a copy of Luke's book, Innovation Games: Creating Breakthrough Products Through Collaborative Play. It contains the "rules" for a dozen games that you can play with your customers and design team to better understand your market and create innovative solutions to their problems.

Here are some of the details of the event:
When: March 18th-19th, 2008 (Tues/Weds)
Where: Renaissance Hotel, 9721 Arboretum Boulevard, Austin TX,
512-795-6006.
Price: $1695/person

Luke Hohmann, author of “Innovation Games: Creating Breakthrough Products
Through Collaborative Play” will be teaching an intensive, two-day class based
on the material found in the book of the same name. Used by corporations such as
SAP, Rally Software Development, QUALCOMM, Emerson Climate Technologies,
Genesyslabs, HP, Aladdin Knowledge Systems, Innovation Games® have been featured
in Software Development Magazine and Soft*Letter, numerous blogs and
conferences.

Designed by Enthiosys, the leading provider of agile product management
consulting services, this course will provide you with the tools to plan, play,
and post-process the results of the games. We’ll also provide you with
comprehensive notes, worksheets, templates, and books to help you your
learning’s into practice.

You can register for the event here.

Comments

John Hannafin said…
Is the book any good?
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Yes, I recommend the book. Otherwise, I wouldn't have posted information about the class :-)

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