Users’ Advocate: Chaos Theory and Practice — Writers and Users in Agile

用户的倡导者: 混沌理论与实践-敏捷中的作家和用户

2023-03-25 10:50 techwhirl

本文共1236个字,阅读需13分钟

阅读模式 切换至中文

Agile. The philosophy has influenced IT development since the 90s, but it still strikes fear into the hearts of writers with a raft of terms and fundamental processes that conjure up some terrifying possibilities. Agile can sound chaotic and hostile to a writer. Scrum: The word just drips with testosterone-charged action, of beefy, sweaty team members locked together and heaving against the opposition. Where does the writer fit in? Am I the ball that’s stomped and kicked into the turf? Lean: No specifications? I have to rely on daily stand-up meetings, face-to-face conversation, email threads, task boards, and the issue tracking system? And I have to use these sources to write doc for product I most likely can’t see or use? Sprint: I’m pushing along in the scrum, racing to produce shippable doc every two to four weeks? Without specs? Or a product? While participating in a daily meeting for every scrum? Even the Agile Manifesto seems to aim a stake straight at the writer’s heart in its core values: “we have come to value working software over comprehensive documentation”. When reading about user documentation in Agile, I’ve noticed that most commentators focus their discussion on assuaging writers’ fears. They suggest processes and techniques for writers to stay sane and productive in the face of chaos, and maybe even to thrive and be happy. I think happy writers are a good thing. However, as I mentioned in a previous column, happy, productive writers do not guarantee user success. I was once a writer happily producing thousands of pages for frustrated users who propped up their monitors with my manuals. I’ve worked in a hybrid Agile environment for about six years now. I’m still (mostly) sane. Feedback from coworkers and customers indicates that I’m still productive. I can say without reservation or qualification that I’m happy. Why am I happy? I’ve experienced some of the writer-friendly aspects of Agile, developed some coping strategies for the not-so-friendly aspects, and I’ve seen some of the benefits that Agile can bring to the user. I think that Agile helps me be a better users’ advocate. Writers in Agile Agile is fast, but several practicalities mitigate the breakneck pace for me. Agile methodologies emphasize continuous iteration in small units of work. The units of work represent very specific user goals. In Scrum, the smallest unit of deliverable work is called a user story. Years of painful pre-Agile lessons taught me to write for reuse, and Agile’s fast-paced, iterative nature punishes custom, ad hoc writing. Topic-based authoring is a natural solution. Stories map nearly one-to-one to topics. Each topic captures a unit of work sufficiently as stand-alone content for presentation to stakeholders and for release notes. When it comes time to integrate the new content, I’ve worked hard to ensure that the overall doc project is flexible and extensible enough to accommodate the new topic with minimal effort to update and enhance longer-form documentation. Speaking of longer-form docs, Agile methodologies may focus on atomic-level units of work, but they also acknowledge the need for larger, big-picture goals and deliverables. For example, Scrum extends the narrative metaphor and collects related stories into epics. I can always negotiate enough time and resources for larger documentation projects in an epic. Because of the constant churn of quick iterations, my to-do list is always full to bursting. As a defense, I perform doc triage on a regular basis. Every deliverable doesn’t require the same level of effort and overhead. For example, a user story and its doc doesn’t always represent a complete and independent feature for customer delivery. The end user can be an internal stakeholder, which means I can still meet requirements with lower demands for production, integration, and delivery (and lower stress). In previous development regimes, I could toil for six months on a product or feature that never saw the light of day. If a deliverable isn’t ready for release, it just gets bumped to the next cycle for the next release. With the release cycle so short, the delay is seldom tragic. My doc content follows right along, staying relevant and fresh both in the product and in my own head. Experience has taught me that I’ll see the feature again soon. Benefits for Users I’ve highlighted some of the features of Agile and my reaction to them as a writer, but what about the user? What, if anything, does the user get out of Agile? Agile timelines with their frequent iterations ensure that the content for an active project is no older than its development cycle. Users get access to updated content every two to six weeks. In addition, when I receive mid-stream feedback or non-critical doc bugs, the doc update is already in the plan. There is no drama. Agile can also improve the quality of these frequent updates. As a visible member of several scrums, I’m constantly talking with developers and product owners. The answer to 90% of my questions is a short conversation or a short stand-up meeting away. My coworkers don’t have a stale, old spec to hide behind. They don’t feel like they need to hide from me because our interactions are quick and painless. I also don’t have a stale, old spec to cling to and give me a false sense of security. I spend much less time answering questions like “Where did you get this? This is completely wrong/old/obsolete!” Although I felt justified in the past when I answered “from the spec”, I got no satisfaction from it. It wasn’t productive. I’d rather not generate bad blood and burn goodwill. I’d rather the doc be correct. Apart from simple mechanical correctness, some of the best ideas for doc enhancements have come from developers, account managers, and support personnel. In the end, my users benefit from richer content. To quote another item from the Agile Manifesto: “we have come to value customer collaboration over contract negotiation.” In theory, customers have a formal and active role in development. In practice, the level of involvement can vary based on several factors, not the least how open they are to collaboration and how capable they are. When I have a friendly, motivated customer, I experience Agile at its most satisfying. I get constructive and innovative feedback from the customer as I’m writing the doc, and I know that all my users will benefit from the customer experience baked into the doc. Agile is not a silver bullet. It’s also not a monster that marginalizes and devours hapless writers. It’s simply a development methodology with its own set of challenges and benefits. I’ve come to interpret the Agile Manifesto’s valuation of “working software” over “comprehensive documentation” not as a threat but as an enjoinder. The goal of product development is not to write detailed specifications and fat reference guides, but to deliver a product that enables user success. Documentation still plays a key role is keeping the user happy and successful. Overall, my time in Agile has led me to my own simple tweak of the Manifesto: “I have come to value working documentation over comprehensive documentation.”
敏捷。自90年代以来,这种哲学一直影响着IT的发展,但它仍然用大量的术语和基本过程唤起了作家的恐惧,这些术语和基本过程唤起了一些可怕的可能性。敏捷听起来对作家来说可能是混乱和敌对的。 Scrum: 这个词只是带着睾丸激素的动作滴落,强壮,出汗的团队成员被锁在一起并与反对派抗衡。作家适合哪里?我是被踩到并踢进草皮的球吗? 精益: 没有规格?我必须依靠日常的站立会议,面对面的对话,电子邮件线程,任务板和问题跟踪系统?而且我必须使用这些资源为我很可能看不到或使用的产品编写文档? Sprint: 我正在努力,每两到四个星期就准备生产可运输的文档?没有规格?还是产品?同时参加每个scrum的日常会议? 甚至敏捷宣言似乎都将核心价值直接对准了作者的核心: “我们已经开始重视工作软件,而不是全面的文档”。 在阅读敏捷中的用户文档时,我注意到大多数评论员将讨论的重点放在减轻作家的恐惧上。他们建议作家在面对混乱时保持理智和富有成效的过程和技术,甚至可以茁壮成长和快乐。我认为快乐的作家是一件好事。但是,正如我在上一篇专栏文章中提到的那样,快乐,富有成效的作家并不能保证用户的成功。我曾经是一名作家,很高兴为沮丧的用户制作数千页,这些用户用我的手册支撑了他们的显示器。 我已经在混合敏捷环境中工作了大约六年。我仍然 (大部分) 理智。同事和客户的反馈表明我仍然富有成效。我可以毫无保留地说我很高兴。我为什么快乐?我体验了敏捷的一些作家友好的方面,针对不太友好的方面开发了一些应对策略,我也看到了敏捷能够给用户带来的一些好处。我认为敏捷可以帮助我成为更好的用户倡导者。 敏捷作家 敏捷速度很快,但是一些实用性减轻了我的惊人速度。 敏捷方法论强调在小的工作单元中不断迭代。工作单位代表了非常具体的用户目标。在Scrum中,可交付工作的最小单位称为用户故事。 多年痛苦的敏捷前课程教会了我写作以供重用,而敏捷的快节奏,迭代的性质惩罚了自定义的临时写作。基于主题的创作是一种自然的解决方案。故事几乎一一映射到主题。每个主题都充分捕获一个工作单元,作为独立内容,以演示给利益相关者和发行说明。当需要集成新内容时,我一直在努力确保整个doc项目足够灵活和可扩展,以最小的努力来更新和增强较长形式的文档,从而适应新主题。 说到更长形式的文档,敏捷方法可能专注于原子级的工作单位,但它们也承认需要更大的、大范围的目标和可交付成果。例如,Scrum扩展了叙事隐喻,并将相关故事收集到史诗中。我总是可以为史诗中的大型文档项目协商足够的时间和资源。 由于快速迭代的不断流失,我的待办事项清单总是充满到爆裂。作为辩护,我定期进行doc分诊。每个可交付成果都不需要相同水平的精力和开销。例如,用户故事及其文档并不总是代表客户交付的完整且独立的功能。最终用户可以是内部利益相关者,这意味着我仍然可以满足对生产,集成和交付的较低要求 (以及较低的压力) 的要求。 在以前的开发制度中,我可以在一个从未见过的产品或功能上辛苦工作六个月。如果一个可交付成果还没有准备好发布,它就会被碰撞到下一个版本的下一个周期。由于发布周期如此之短,延迟很少是悲惨的。我的文档内容一直遵循,在产品和我自己的脑海中保持相关性和新鲜感。经验告诉我,我很快就会再次看到该功能。 对用户的好处 我已经强调了敏捷的一些功能以及我作为作家对它们的反应,但是用户呢?如果有的话,用户从敏捷中得到什么? 敏捷的时间表及其频繁的迭代确保了活动项目的内容不超过其开发周期。用户每两到六周就可以访问更新的内容。另外,当我收到中流反馈或非关键文档错误时,文档更新已经在计划中。没有戏剧。 敏捷还可以提高这些频繁更新的质量。 作为几个scrum的可见成员,我一直在与开发人员和产品所有者交谈。我的90% 问题的答案是简短的对话或简短的站立会议。我的同事没有陈旧的旧规格。他们不觉得需要对我隐瞒,因为我们的互动既迅速又无痛。我也没有陈旧的旧规格可以坚持,给我一种错误的安全感。我花更少的时间回答诸如 “您从哪里得到的?这是完全错误的/旧的/过时的!”尽管过去当我回答“ 来自规范 ”时,我感到很合理,但我对此并不满意。没有成效。我宁愿不生出坏血,也不烧掉善意。我宁愿医生是正确的。 除了简单的机械正确性之外,一些用于doc增强的最佳想法还来自开发人员,客户经理和支持人员。最终,我的用户受益于更丰富的内容。 引用敏捷宣言中的另一项: “我们重视客户合作而不是合同谈判。” 从理论上讲,客户在开发中具有正式而积极的作用。在实践中,参与程度可以根据几个因素而有所不同,尤其是他们对合作的开放程度和能力。当我有一个友好、积极的客户时,我会体验到最令人满意的敏捷。在编写文档时,我从客户那里得到了建设性和创新性的反馈,而且我知道我的所有用户都将从文档中获得的客户体验中受益。 敏捷不是灵丹妙药。它也不是一个边缘化和吞噬不幸作家的怪物。它只是一种具有自己的一系列挑战和好处的开发方法。我来解释敏捷宣言对 “工作软件” 而不是 “全面文档” 的评价不是威胁,而是一种要求。产品开发的目标不是编写详细的规格和fat参考指南,而是交付使用户成功的产品。文档仍然起着关键作用,那就是保持用户的快乐和成功。 总的来说,我在敏捷领域的时间让我对宣言进行了简单的调整: “我开始重视工作文档而不是全面的文档。”

以上中文文本为机器翻译,存在不同程度偏差和错误,请理解并参考英文原文阅读。

阅读原文