Natural Order Development

In developing project criteria/use cases/stories a certain point is reached where it is concluded that "enough" has been done and the results are "good" to begin work. Which is to say that the requirements are "good enough."

It is not unusual to wonder, after work begins, if the information really was good enough. It is worth re-evaluating the requirements once a little effort has been done. This helps to flush out missing details. A reasonable set of questions to ask are:

• Were any important variables missed in collecting the data used to produce the requirements?
• Did the product owner/client state the business needs for the requirements clearly?
• Did the technical team understand the business requirements?
• Was some significant relationship between requirements overlooked?
• Has some new factor come to light that affects the requirements?
• How valid were the generalizations?
• And most important, do the requirements correctly convey the underlying conceptual messages about the business needs?