| Initiate Project [message #580932] |
Wed, 01 August 2007 12:31 |
 Roman Smirak
Messages: 136
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
the Initiate project activity says that we prepare Vision and then plan
the project based on understanding of stakeholder's needs and features of a
system which should address the needs; the Project plan contains milestone
per every phase and iteration. Does it mean we define the iteration
objectives based on features and refine it later in terms of use
cases/scenarios? (I see this scenario or transactional way of thinking or
objectives as a prerequisite for proper iteration which should produce
something demo-able or shippable, i.e. complete scenario from a user
perspective). If so, can this be explicitly stated in Plan Iteration task? I
guess this is quite important to mention since it touches the core of the
principle..
Next issue: RUP says at several places that Inception phase should remain
short and simple in order to avoid analysis paralysis, big requirements
up-front or still-enough-time syndrome (and many others - e.g. you don't
focus on right risk mitigation) - e.g. RUP (RUP Lifecycle page) says
Inception usually takes 10 % of the schedule, or it uses term "short
Inception" several times. I didn't find any warning or practical limit in
OpenUP - is there any other mechanism avoiding all the anti-patterns
mentioned above?
Substantiation: I see "Big Inception phase" anti-pattern in projects
migrating to RUP from traditional model since they don't want to provide any
estimates until they analyse entire domain (- which often leads to analysis
paralysis, etc.); moreover, as they remain in Inception, they don't plan
proper iteration as they do in Elaboration - i.e. risk driven, including
early integration and testing, the developers continue in fragmented and
separated work (often just reading or learning which is quite inefficient in
many cases) - and so I'm forcing them to move to Elaboration as soon as
possible, however, some tool or rule making this more visible or explicit
would be great. What do you make about that? Do you have similar experience?
Thanks,
Roman
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03543 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
