Reaching agreement on product requirements is at the heart of the Business and IT partnership. Typically, organizations use the ritual of signing-off, even though it’s typically all about signing on!
It’s unfortunate that I use the term ‘ritual’ but all too often it seems that the activity is performed mainly for its symbolic value: with people being either reluctant to give their signature, refusing their signature, avoiding a signature, giving their signature for the sake of giving or giving it all too freely. Some, statements I have heard “professionals” say:
Sound familiar? Each is a massive warning sign, which will inevitably lead to future conflict. Let’s remind ourselves of the purpose of the requirements document sign-off activity:
To review with the intent to endorse or reject a shared definition of the product to be delivered
This sounds simple enough, what’s the big deal? The big deal is the connotations that come with it. I suggest that the problem stems from a variety of masks ranging from fear through bravado to carelessness, regardless we need to remedy the situation.
Here are 17 tips for a meaningful sign-off:
- Select a review group that covers all viewpoints
- Explain the need for a shared understanding
- Explain the intention of the document
- Educate the reviewers in content and meaning
- Advise the reviewer the value they bring
- Discuss personal viewpoints e.g. I can use it, I can build it, I can test it
- Ensure reviewers know what acceptance means
- Advise the subsequent processes for the possible outcomes
- Reassure that it is a best picture of the requirements
- Explain the best picture is relevant to right now
- Agree that requirements change
- Agree change may requires additional cost, people or time
- Concur change may impact on external areas
- Accord defects are so when they can be traced to a requirement
- Communicate that it is acceptable to reject the document
- Realize that ‘no comment’ is an indication of a poor review
- Don’t consider grammatical correction as feedback
Notice I use words like ‘intention’ and ‘best’, nothing is perfect – particularly project journeys, but the above can help you get stakeholders on board and aboard the right train.
Filed under: Planning & Management, Solution Assessment Tagged: | #babite, #babokSA, #requirements, #review, #sign-off, #stakeholder
Most people can’t wrap their brains around an entire Requirements Package and give good feedback. Batching requirements in this way is an example of hoping to lower coordination costs. The result is often an increase in transaction and quality costs that overshadows any savings in coordinate costs.
So, while I agree with everything in your 17 points, I also suggest that requirements are developed progressively and reviewed in small subsets that align with demand from the developing organization.
Dennis Stevens
Great advice Dennis. It certainly makes sense to break things up: be it into modularized packages or iterative delivery. Far more tolerable for people than lengthy document review sessions!
The ‘what’ above can be implemented ‘how’ you like. The key is that the intention is understood, otherwise sign-off may not be very meaningful.