Visual requirements & co-design techniques

visual requirements and co-design techniques
casebook always innovating

Accelerate agility development in hybrid remote/onsite teams at Casebook

Issues
  • Technology projects within the human services domain are complex, given changing regulations and the evolving definition of best practice
  • Commercial technology within Casebook must support a range of configurations that are determined by programs, state and local agency practice 
  • Multistep workflows, include branching based on organization complexity (e.g., more or less hierarchy means more or fewer levels of approvals to support in workflow) 
  • Microservices architecture demands requirements that define frontend and backend “behavior” in a way that informs discussions on scope, technical approach, and constraints
Methods
  • Our team completed preliminary research including secondary research, contextual interviews with stakeholders in multiple agencies 
  • We defined problems to solve and scoped a solution that responds to those problems working as a crossfunctional team that included remote and in-office team members
  • Instead of creating a Product Requirements Document (PRD) and creating visuals as auxiliary items to that PRD, we created workflows with wireframes in an online whiteboarding tool (Miro, Lucidchart, Web Whiteboard) and embedded requirements there as text 
  • We iterated with additional refined wireframes, and then with mockups with final design components included
  • Within Project Inception meeting, we reviewed the whiteboard together as a team
  • We continued to iterate and test resulting designs with users via remote testing, leveraging prototyping software (Invision, Storybook) as a tool
Benefits
  • Teams can see defined scope and peruse the requirements at their pace and can consume the information based on learning preferences (audio/visual) 
  • Even though some of us are remote from each other, we create “sticky notes” with questions, risks and dependencies. Remote team members see their feedback recorded 
  • We identify stories that require longer discussions or further research to identify the right  technical approach and schedule
  • We reduced time and expense spent on user studies with remote interviews
Conclusion
  • Team members consume information differently and approach to defining requirements should support their differences.
  • The team posted higher confidence scores at the end of inception based on ability to consume information and see their feedback similar to how you would in a traditional inception.
  • Our team tightened timelines for identifying and prioritizing user stories.
  • The resulting application was effectively refined with remote user interviews where users could interact with design in prototype version, for less cost and time spent.
Meagan Cooke

Meagan Cooke, Senior Director, Product

Thank you for your interest in my presentation on how Casebook accelerated agile development in hybrid/onsite teams through the techniques mentioned in my presentation poster. Above you will find more details around the presentation. It was an honor to be an ISM 2019 Emerging Leader!

Casebook dashboard

Be a part of the conversation!

In recent years the Casebook PBC team led sessions about agile development at the APHSA/ISM conference. We would like to continue the conversation throughout the year. Are you interested in challenges, processes, ideas surrounding agile development for human services? Connect with us and be alerted about subsequent webinars and articles on this topic.

Menu