Navigating through stakeholder pressures and changing requirements may become a complex task. We will discuss some cases where businesses seek scope modifications in the middle of an ongoing iteration and explore proactive measures to prevent these scenarios.
Why do they want to pivot?
We’ve all encountered instances where business considerations disrupt the meticulously planned and approved iteration or impending release, prompting the development team to handle requests for tweaks, reprioritization, or even a complete overhaul of the agreed-upon scope. This recurrent scenario highlights the dynamic nature of product management, where external factors often necessitate agile responses to ensure the successful alignment of project goals with evolving business needs.
However, even small scope modifications tend to introduce noticeable or severe disruptions to the workflow. Many times, changes in scope lead to the introduction of new tasks that don’t integrate as smoothly into the original development plan. The team may find itself compelled to halt ongoing tasks midway, only to later revisit and potentially redo them to align with the revised scope, leading to a loss of time and, ultimately, money. These interruptions extend to the testing process, including regression testing, adding an additional layer of complexity and the chance for errors. The need for adjustments can take a toll on the team’s morale, posing challenges to sustained productivity, particularly when these pivot requests become frequent or pervasive.
We’ve all found ourselves in this predicament, and we all share a disdain for it. But the recurring question is: why does it keep happening? And, more importantly, how can we evade it? Are stakeholders genuinely the ones to blame?
Aside from instances where stakeholders genuinely struggle to make decisions or take responsibility for their choices, the reality is that, in most cases, the challenge of managing scope fluctuations within the already defined iteration arises from three straightforward reasons. I genuinely believe that the primary reasons for changes in scope coming from business are caused by the business stating that they don’t believe they are receiving the product they asked for or the product they need based on the market demand.
So, why could this possibly happen?
1. Business to Product Miscommunication and Misalignment
In the process of delivering the business idea for a new product or functionality, there might be one of two pitfalls that undermine the successful identification of how these will look and work.
It usually happens in one of the following scenarios
Business has vague vision
In this scenario, which is much more common than anyone (especially in business) can imagine, the vision is there but lacks specificity, details, and clarity. Stakeholders may express something like, “we need this to work sorta this way, just figure it out for us.”
Unfortunately, it’s a prevalent situation, and the Product Manager shoulders the burden. It’s one of the most challenging aspects of our role—to collect these small breadcrumbs of requirements and transform them into a viable concept that can be further communicated to those responsible for designing, prototyping, and conducting user testing. If successful, it then moves on to delivering the scope to the Product Owner for translation into epics and stories.
That’s why it’s extremely important to ensure that the Product team goes the extra mile in asking as many questions as possible and verifies all findings with the Business, as if the project’s success depends on every tiny detail—because it does. A slight deviation from the vision, if not well defined, may lead to significant divergence, resulting in time and money wasted.
Business has clear vision but it was not properly captured
This chain—Business – Product Manager – Design – Product Owner – Developers—has enough steps where a breakdown in communication can happen and hinder the entire fate of the iteration or release. Insufficient or ambiguous documentation, as well as unclear communication during the initial agreement with the business, and a lack of clear verification of details—ensuring a clear understanding of what the business wants and the kind of product or functionality they will receive in the end to support that vision—may also lead to the wrong course taken and effort spent for nothing.
Making sure that the business’s vision aligns with the Product team’s understanding of that vision is crucial. Misalignment in this regard can lead to subsequent requests for scope changes.
2. Delayed Response to Market
Delayed definition of MVP or next releases
Taking too much time to define the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) or subsequent releases after conducting market studies can result in not keeping pace with evolving user demands. It’s only reasonable to request scope updates if it becomes absolutely clear (and the numbers support it) that the product is slowly, or even in some cases rapidly, becoming obsolete.
Competitive research failure
Also, a change in the competitive landscape or the introduction of a new feature by a competitor can trigger a desire to modify the scope. These days, competitive pressure and imitation pose a real risk of ending up with a less exciting or sometimes even a useless product.
And last but not least, there is the third significant reason why a scope update may be very well justified.
3. Emerging Trends and Technologies
– when rapid advancements in technology or shifts in consumer preferences may prompt businesses to reconsider their product features.
In essence, the primary reason for businesses seeking changes and pivots in scope often boils down to miscommunication. While acknowledging the valid concern of a slow response to market changes or advances in technologies, it’s important to recognize that, in some cases, this challenge is difficult to circumvent. Therefore, the key lies in investing significant time and effort in ensuring a clear understanding of the business’s vision and gaining stakeholders’ assurance regarding the specific product they will receive upon the completion of the MVP or the next release. Additionally, obtaining solid assurance of stakeholder understanding regarding the exact product delivery, and conducting thorough market and user research are crucial aspects of the process.
The Solutions
So, what is the strategy to avoid these main three reasons for scope adjustments in the middle of an ongoing release?
- Ensure Clear Confirmation and Agreement:
- Invest effort in clearly understanding the business’s vision. Based on the vision, explicitly define the MVP or the next release.
- Alignment with Stakeholder Understanding:
- Obtain solid assurance that stakeholders’ vision is captured in your findings carefully and exactly, and that stakeholders carry a clear understanding regarding the specific product they will receive at the end of the release.
- Swift Response to Market Changes:
- Conduct thorough market and user research to make informed decisions for the Product roadmap. Divide releases into smaller, manageable chunks to effectively align with initial findings, ensuring the product remains current and relevant.
- Regularly Review and Update Strategy Prior to Development Process:
- Regularly review and update the strategy to ensure it remains aligned with initial findings and current market conditions.
- Adapt strategically to technology evolvement
- Formulate a streamlined strategy for integrating emerging technologies, ensuring a gradual approach, provide concise stakeholder education, make focused adjustments to the roadmap in alignment with trends, seek input from external experts for validation, and assure stakeholders of the project’s future-proofing against advancements.
So, ultimately, it’s up to the Product Manager (or whoever holds the Product Manager responsibilities) to proactively ensure the satisfaction of both stakeholders and the team, avoiding the need for scope modifications. Let’s not blame stakeholders for the downfalls of our own doing!
These are the main reasons why stakeholders’ requests to modify scope in the midst of development are justified. Stay tuned for situations when requests for scope changes are less reasonable, and learn ways to manage business to avoid stressing the team by changing the product direction as much as possible.
Ensuring a harmonious understanding between the business stakeholders and developers is paramount to prevent or significantly reduce scope modifications during a project’s lifecycle. Clarity in communication about what the business envisions and what developers aim to deliver is the linchpin for successful project outcomes. Our Business Requirements Documentation template serves as a valuable tool in fostering this clarity. Explore our template to enhance your product management practices and establish a robust foundation for seamless collaboration between business and development teams.
No responses yet