1 thief and robbers
Author: Bo Zhang Xing
Citizen2yy@hotmail.com
8 Everyone is in the first, it is a thief, it is a robber, and the sheep does not listen to them.
We already know the need for demand analysis, which means that we think that the current demand process is not perfect. This imperfection is largely reflected in the gap between "problem statement" and "people who really want to", "the problem statement" is not able to state clear "something really wants".
Here we introduce 2 words: ambiguity, and mix.
Here, the ambiguity means that the "problem statement" we got has led to a number of understandings, so that we cannot determine which understanding can truly explain "problem". Amation is a more embarrassing expression, it means that "problem statement" is unknown, even unable to express clear meaning.
In the past few years, the era of software projects and software projects have been fashionable, many people have been fashion, and they must be automated, and they are software engineering, as if all development problems have been resolved. What's more, some people also believe that the root cause of the ambiguity in demand analysis is because of the participation of "people". They claim that the uncertainty of "people" has led to the uncertainty of "statement", which leads to ambiguity of "problem statement" proposed by "people". Also, they believe that this ambiguity can be eliminated as long as the factors in the demand analysis process are excluded, and then use a strict argument, highly automated, standardized methodology. So, maybe we can ask if this analysis should also "eliminate" "customers" with serious uncertainty, because we really can't think of the customer.
In fact, the more extreme views in the last section are a pathological understanding of tools such as Case, CAD. Tools can help people work, but it is not able to completely replace people. Let's take a project how to kill the project.
Some people who don't listen to the cockroaches can be used to kill the cockroaches in an automated way, the steps are as follows: 1 Dirty Wash this automation method and the Case or CAD tool so-called automation process, in a case document, the CASE tool consists of three steps: 1, analyze and design a clear demand specification 2, Establish a function point and source code (and document), one-to-one data dictionary 3, convert the demand specification to source code and document, and some people will say that automation kills the way is purely funny, because no cockroach will Take the intermediate of the chopping board, even if it happens to stand in the chopping board, it will not wait for your tempura. This reason is just the reason why the automation tool we think is inseparable from the factors that we don't open "people". Because we have no way to use automation tools to analyze clear demand specifications, it cannot be used to ensure that this demand specification manner will never change.
[Picking up the wife]
Automation method is "big things". 40 years ago, it takes a lot of weeks to complete the work. It is only one hour to get it. Moreover, due to the development of automation tools, we have also begun to challenge systems that don't want to think before. However, with the advancement of the tool, there is no much improvement in the reputation of software products in the availability.
For those who have clear, statement, no ambiguity, moderate modeled, automated methods are very good; but there are also some tricky problems involving human psychology but cannot be solved with these methods. In other words, as long as it is regular, unified development process, the automation method is very good; while differences between different projects or products require more detailed analysis.
We may wish to make a simple calculation. There is a problem with a P% of the scale of S. As a common problem, there is a question of Q% (q p = 100) as a personality problem. At time t1, we need to put T1 each to solve a public problem, and you need to put M. Solving personalization issues accounted for: r1 = m × q × q / (t × p m × q). At time t2, we need to put T2 every time a public issue is required, and each resolved a personality problem needs to be put into M. Solving a personal problem accounted for: R2 = M × Q / (t × p m × q). From T1 to T2, the automation level is improved, there is a small change in T >> T, public problems, and personality issues, and the investment in each personality problem is small, that is, M ≈M. Thereby, R1 << R2 can be obtained. This shows that as the automation level has rapidly increased, our investment in personality issues has grown sharply. Personality issues, that is, humanity factors, but more important as automation is increased. This feature has become a consensus among people who have experience in developing experience. That is, experienced experts have less investment in technical tasks, and more in terms of human factors. On those small obvious questions, they were completely assured to others; and they were deeply attracted by those who would never end.
[Yeah Learn]
The language is the tool we express our thinking, and it is also a carrier of a culture. In the development system method, we also have a language, that is, the symbol system. I believe that everyone has encountered an exchange barrier due to the unreasonable language; also, in the symbol system, we have also encountered an exchange barrier.
The information transmitted by the language text includes "connotation" and "epitaxial". When people talking about information, they often add a variety of vocabulary, expressions, and movements as the extension of their voice; even we can think that we are from all different provinces and cities, all kinds of dialects Delivered extension.
So, for the same event or demand, I believe that there is no description of two people is exactly the same. Acknowledging this difficulties for our face-to-face demand analysis.
We give two important requirements for excellent symbolic systems (of course this is just two of many requirements) to help us use these symbols in the future. For example, first, the symbol system must compare most of the problems we have encountered; second in order to suit the process development of product development, the results of the symbolic system are relatively easy to save and revise. This is also the basic requirement for an excellent Case and CAD tools: you can retain and modify our current results at any time.
[Datong World]
In the future of the future, people are in two languages, one is a dialect representing the characteristics of the present nation, and the other is a Chinese language that everyone can understand. This world language is very different from the so-called World language of the current language world, although the latter's goal is to become the former, this gap is like communism and socialism.
Although most people think that their native is wonderful, it is undeniable that every language has its own advantages. Similarly, each symbolic system has its own advantages and disadvantages. Here we introduce a concept: map.
We call the information set with the basic symbols of the symbol system, called map. The "mapping" here is taken from logical correspondence. Everyone can approximate the correspondence between "Information" and "Symbol Unit" established by some convention. The mapping is divided into 1-1 corresponds, 1-n corresponds to three kinds of n-1. Since the information exists in nature is the high order or not, the 1-1 corresponding to the strict sense is not existed; in turn, 1-1 mapping in strict sense can even be said to be worthless. Here, we use a map to represent the results of our symbolic system, the map can be a voice, or a map, or a graphic VCD; as long as it meets reproducible, modified, saving, can. A good quality map must be able to make all relevant personnel to understand, just like a Chinese language in the world. Of course, this is just an ideal expectation. In fact, everyone supporters for each language or symbol system claim that their things is the best, sounding a bit like "Wang Po selling melon". At this time, people generally put their "melon" selling points on "intuitive" or "readability", which is obvious, this is a good condition that should have conditions.
However, for children who grow up in Beijing, it will naturally believe that Mandarin is intuitive; for children growing up in the United States, they will think that American English is the most beautiful. That is, training for language can increase "intuitiveness" and "readability" on the user's angle. It's like we look at the technical literature. Since we are familiar with the latest vocabulary, you will not feel ISO, CMM's abbreviation is difficult to understand; and the first Internet can think that OICQ is "I love Chongqing "abbreviation of.
In short, what is said earlier is that the symbol system itself is impossible to completely "intuitive" and "easy reading".
If, let all the relevant people can understand some symbolic system, then the most direct way is to train these related personnel. The following steps can test how much it is in the case of the current map:
1. Show each map map to those who don't know this symbolic system. This method can reveal that it is not intuitive in the symbol system. Of course, it is also possible to reveal that the part of the information that needs to be expressed in this map itself is not intuitive. (Corresponding to different languages, it is equivalent to letting a vision of Minnan language speak in a forum in Shanghai with hometown.)
2, let everyone remember the understanding of the map with their familiar symbolics, and then let a person who understands the two symbolic systems to check. This can reveal some of the artificial assumptions in the map. (Corresponding to different languages, it is equivalent to each person to express the meaning of the required expression, and then let the translation of the two places to correct the deviation)
3. Use some kind of automation tool that automatically converts other symbolic symbolic systems. (Corresponding to different languages, it is equivalent to learning Mandarin before speaking, and then speaks with Mandarin.)
The difference between the understanding of the map map due to different symbol systems is equivalent to communication disorders due to the unlivary of language. The most direct most common way is to postpone the progress of the demand, first let everyone learn this language (or symbolic system). However, this is not practical, because it is possible to lose your interest and impulse to the demand process. Experience shows that these learning time will be made as part of the demand phase, because this time we can solve the problem while learning the language.
[Chicken with duck]
People who have learned information theory know that the complete all-way system does not exist. In other words, as we say in the previous, in the demand work, 1-1 mapping in strict sense does not exist. This feels most for pragmatic people. The word is suitable for use to describe the state of military operations, which is like a military rule: "When there is a map and the actual terrain, it is necessary to believe in the actual terrain." For this, the idiom "Talks" has been outlined very well. But we believe that there are still many people who are keen on "paper talk" in this world. Especially when using those so-called advanced automation tools, they tend to forget what people need to be trustworthy and be trustworthy. The following example is a real case I encountered in this month, the purpose is to explain the attitude of "paper talk" will bring demand deviation and ambiguity.
We participated in a bid for a few months, of course we won the bid. As a project, the relevant parties involved in bidding include Party A (buyer), Party B (seller) and the design side. The designer uses the model BX product in the sketch of the design. This option does not write to the technical manual during the bidding process, because the design side only focuses on the model BX product technical indicators to meet the design requirements. In the formal contract after the winning bid, considering the cost-effective problem, Party B and the designer consultations on product technical indicators, and reached a consistent, and finally selected models BY products, BY products fully meet BX products in the project Demand, therefore, and in the formal technical agreement does not have any word of BX and BY. As the project is carried out, Party A suddenly proposed feedback from Party B in the day of acceptance, and said to refuse products. The reason is that this bid is part of the overall project of Party A, while Party A, the bidding and implementation of other parts are designed in accordance with the BX model. So, should this sketch in this technical design should be used as a limited restriction? Is there a legitimate effectiveness as a product model labeled as a schematic manner? Alternatively, whether the design is written in the design of the model BX to deviate from the "design drawings"? --Citizen2yy
What I have to say is that the problems in the example are largely related to the symbolic systems used by the design, and if we can reach a consensus on the "real requirements", things will not be expensive.
[Warning]
1. In life (or development project), we tend to meet some of the people (non-professional personnel), which makes us very depressed. Obviously, everyone is impossible to invest in the product as the designer, but they are not willing to miss every silk. When non-professionals don't want or disdain, when I understand the design process, I hire a comparable minority, and the symbol system and the mapped map played this in product design. Mediate the role of the person.
2. An important reason for people who are unwilling to participate in the design process is the current so-called "professional designer" high posture. Need to pay attention to customers and others (actually deciding the ruling of the results) just not to understand the development process, they are experts in other aspects (such as laws, business, etc.), which is the reason they need to participate. . If you can build a world that harmony with communication, I believe that the world will be better.
3, a part of the stubborn and loyal support of the automation process, their "intuitive" symbolic system is very easy to understand by others, just like a 5-year-old girl who grew up in Beijing Hutong, "Mandarin is the easiest to understand Language ". The simple way to change this child is to let him teach a foreign child to speak Mandarin; change these stubborn guys, let them explain the symbol system to 100 different degrees, and the audience of different nations clear.
4. For two groups of experts in two batches of different backgrounds in the same needs, they often tend to speak two different symbol systems. So the best way is to express it in two different symbolics systems. 5. Use a language that everyone can understand as a formal document will be more effective, then it is also preferred to specify a "Everyone" symbol system as a formal document in advance during the demand process. If you don't understand, let him learn.
6, the translation between different native tongues will have the advantages and disadvantages, and the translation between the same symbol system is also excellent. Behind the advantages and disadvantages are differences, which is ambiguous. The demand process has experienced the steps from the real end user - user representative - the needs analyst - the demand specification manual, each step is a translation, so it is especially true that each step is optimal. It is important.
7, it should be noted that the demand process is not entirely a waterfall. As the process is in-depth, we are very likely to row like old cows. Therefore, our exploration will also consider how to quickly perform "revocation" operations.
