4 ms·

About 1 year ago I changed the way we find requirements. This was after reading about non-violent communication. The basic premise is: find out what people need

About 1 year ago I changed the way we find requirements. This was after reading about non-violent communication. The basic premise is: find out what people need. Not what people want. Most of the time users will come and say what they want. They basically describe what their "perfect" implementation should look like. But almost never do they describe what needs they have. Or what they really wanna solve with that suggested implementation. Now we always ask: What's your need? They can suggest possible solutions/implementation. But that's only a suggestion. One extra benefit when asking about needs is, the person who implements that feature can better empathize with the user.

driggs 5y ago
"Need" and "require" are synonyms.
dav_Oz 5y ago
As a supplement for anyone who is unfamiliar with the communication side of things: In our highly solution-focused (and -driven) societies it is hard to actually see much less adequately express underlying needs[0] to yourself and especially other people. For example I'm very adept at leapfroging over all that 'chit-chat' about observations, feelings, emotions, needs and getting right to the juicy 'objective' of possible solutions, often at the dire expense of my actual needs and making me even more deaf to the needs of the other people involved. Well, surprisingly a lot of tenacious conflicts aren't characterized by a lack of a set of solutions quite the opposite, they get stuck because of the unwillingness (of both parties) in considering to change one's 'strategies' in order to fulfill the underlying often unexpressed needs (as defined above). At an impasse there are usually two disregarded meta-strageties at play in order to force a quick 'solution': (1) My set of strategies had brought me success otherwise I wouldn't be in my advantageous position X so I will continue using them, no matter what. (2) (At some point) I will say "yes" and ignore (some of) my needs in an attempt to appease. As it is clear both (desperate) attempts are self-defeating (in the long term). [0]http://www.transformativeinquiry.ca/TIbook/c4/c4/c4s1.html http://www.transformativeinquiry.ca/TIbook/c4/c4/c4s1.html

driggs 5y ago

"Need" and "require" are synonyms.

dav_Oz 5y ago

As a supplement for anyone who is unfamiliar with the communication side of things: In our highly solution-focused (and -driven) societies it is hard to actually see much less adequately express underlying needs[0] to yourself and especially other people. For example I'm very adept at leapfroging over all that 'chit-chat' about observations, feelings, emotions, needs and getting right to the juicy 'objective' of possible solutions, often at the dire expense of my actual needs and making me even more deaf to the needs of the other people involved. Well, surprisingly a lot of tenacious conflicts aren't characterized by a lack of a set of solutions quite the opposite, they get stuck because of the unwillingness (of both parties) in considering to change one's 'strategies' in order to fulfill the underlying often unexpressed needs (as defined above). At an impasse there are usually two disregarded meta-strageties at play in order to force a quick 'solution': (1) My set of strategies had brought me success otherwise I wouldn't be in my advantageous position X so I will continue using them, no matter what. (2) (At some point) I will say "yes" and ignore (some of) my needs in an attempt to appease. As it is clear both (desperate) attempts are self-defeating (in the long term). [0]http://www.transformativeinquiry.ca/TIbook/c4/c4/c4s1.html http://www.transformativeinquiry.ca/TIbook/c4/c4/c4s1.html