1 files changed, 28 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/sifterapp/requiresments-vs-assumptions.txt b/sifterapp/requiresments-vs-assumptions.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b5287c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/sifterapp/requiresments-vs-assumptions.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+One of the toughest things any team has to do is grow and change. Yet adapting to these changes is perhaps the most important part of growing your software business. There is, as they say, no constant but change. Projects change, goals change. 
+
+Ultimately customers drive software development. And since most projects don't start with many customers, change is inevitable. Change can be difficult, but failing to adapt as your project grows is the surest way to doom it. 
+
+The biggest risk many companies and development teams face is that you end up working on the wrong things. When the project needs change your team needs to change with it, otherwise you end up wasting time and development effort on things that are better left undone -- things that are no longer necessary, but still feel necessary.
+
+To avoid this and maintain the sort of team and company culture that is able to adapt and change as the project needs change, it helps to cultivate a culture in which there are no sacred cows. That is, to let go of all the things you *think* you need to do and stop, listen to your customers, and figure out what you *really* need to do.
+
+Consider, for example, your project's list of "requirements". It's very likely that before you ever wrote a single line of code you wrote out some basic "requirements", things you thought your software needed to be able to do. In the beginning that's good, though be careful with the word "requirement".
+
+The things that we define as “requirements” at the beginning of a project are actually little more than assumptions based on incomplete information. Not a line of code has been written and you're already sure you know what your customers want? It can be humbling to realize, but the truth is you most likely have only a vague idea of what your customers want. 
+
+To know what your customers really want, and what your requirements actually are, you need customers. If you get too rigid too early, define too many things as "requirements", before you know it everyone down the chain of command believes those requirements are immutable simply because they're called requirements. It's too rigid of a word. You end up wasting time on features and improvements your customers don't even want just because you labeled them "requirements".
+
+To give a real world example, we thought an option to "theme" and brand Sifter was an absolute requirement, but after launching, we found that almost none of our customers cared. We've received maybe three half-hearted requests for an option to theme Sifter in 6+ years. What we thought was a requirement would have been a waste of time if we had kept pursuing it. The team at Basecamp also apparently felt that theming was no longer a requirement, the new version of Basecamp dropped support for custom themes. If customers don't want it, ditch it.
+
+On the other hand new "requirements" may come up. Customers may clamor for something you never even considered. These are the features you want to invest your time in.
+
+So how do you find that balance? How do you know which features really should be requirements and which just feel like requirements because you've been calling them that for so long?
+
+One of the best ways is to step back and re-evaluate your requirements on a regular basis, perhaps when you sit down to set the priority of your issues or during weekly/monthly reviews. This alone will help change your team's outlook on "requirements" by making them a moving target. More often than not, when a team comes up with a list of requirements they're more focused on checking off the items on that initial list than they are about stepping back to see if they’re really getting those features right or if customers even want those features at all.
+
+Another helpful thing is to drop the whole concept of requirements, or at least use the word sparingly. When *everything* is called a "requirement", nothing is a requirement. Toss that word around too casually and it becomes disingenuous at best and unrealistic at worst.
+
+One of the best ways of changing your approach to requirements is by making features earn their way. Is the feature something your customers are clamoring for? Or something you yourself desperately need? For instance, a lot of things that teams often think are requirements before launch turn out to be entirely unimportant post-launch when customers start making requests. If your customers haven't asked for something there's a good chance it's not a requirement. It might still be a cool new feature or something that's nice to have, but it's not a requirement.
+
+The whole approach of viewing things as “mandatory” for success is often plain wrong. Many of a project's "requirements" turn out to be incorrect assumptions. The sooner you let go of those assumptions the sooner your team can get that burden off their shoulders and the sooner you can get back to work on the things that really are important to your customers.
+