Decoding Sprint Failures: It's Not The Specs

Once upon a time, in the midst of a sprint gone sideways, a debate arose 📣. One voice attributed the chaos to not having detailed enough specs. Another argued for tighter sprint acceptance criteria.

👉 But here's the thing: these are often just surface symptoms of deeper, more complex challenges.

Problem #1: The 'You Spec, I Code' Paradigm

There's a frequent disconnect where engineers are expected to simply code to a spec. This approach overlooks the rich, collaborative potential between engineers and product teams.

Problem #2: Resistance to Change

Many engineers dread the prospect of revising their work to accommodate new specs. This fear can create an environment resistant to iteration and improvement.

Problem #3: The 'Cover My A**’ Syndrome

A reliance on tight specs can sometimes be less about clarity and more about avoiding responsibility: "I build what you asked me to". It's a defensive stance that undermines true teamwork, shared accountability and long-term ownership.

Recognizing these problems is just the start. Here’s how we can turn these challenges into opportunities:

1️⃣ Encourage Co-Creation: Replace the 'You State, I Code' model with a collaborative approach where engineers and product teams work in tandem, enriching the process with their diverse insights. Designers, engineers, product managers all work on the same sprint tasks at the same time, rather than communicate through documents alone.

2️⃣ Foster Experimentation: Encourage a culture where joint exploration is the path to acquiring knowledge and learning more about the problem space. Getting finished work in the hands of users will provide insights you cannot get in any other way.

3️⃣ Embrace and Plan for Change: Embrace change as a constant and design architectures that are adaptable. Explicitly design for future iterations and ensure that options remain available as you move forward.