3 ms·
This is good, but unless you're a minimal team of one or two (or even if you are), sometimes the best thing is to get a bunch of tweaks (say 5-10) done in a wee
by felixyz 3y ago
This is good, but unless you're a minimal team of one or two (or even if you are), sometimes the best thing is to get a bunch of tweaks (say 5-10) done in a week or two, because it makes users feel like you care, and they might add up to a considerable improvement in satisfaction/delight although individually each is insignificant. In other words: polish can't wait forever.
- alexpotato 3y ago100% agree. Another way to look at it: if you deliver a couple of quick tweaks that the users want in the next week, that can buy you some time to do more behind the scenes refactoring/tech debt cleanup.
- BerislavLopac 3y agoI think that the boxes on the "importance" scale are not very well named. I would personally use something like Critical, Important and Nice-to-have; or maybe a variation of the good old MoSCoW (Must, Should, Could; the "Won'ts" can be omitted for obvious reasons. That being said, I can imagine each team having their own definition and levels of importance, with the names that are meaningful within their particular context.
- closed 3y agoIt seems like this is a lot of the strategy behind pitching things as epics. If tweaks interact to produce considerable satisfaction / delight, then bundling them together keeps focus on what big thing happens when they're all completed..!