Business Requirements

[James Barrow]

I'm with the Architecture department.  And, like you suggested, I included a
fairly clean matrix that listed the business requirements at the top of the
table, and the derived functional requirements at the bottom.

The problem (see "convoluted" previously) is that the PMO gathered
requirements and specs for one out of twelve facilities (user groups) and
tried to pass these requirements off as all-encompassing.  When I came on
board I looked at all of the facilities and noted that the developers were
going to start work with only 1/12th of the requirements.  This is when the
firestorm started.  And, like a room full of kindergartners, the PMO stood
up and said, "The Architecture team is dumb. We're not playing with you any
more."

On a personal level I have a difficult time with this.  My brain wants to
see the backwards traceability of the functional requirements to the
business requirements, not FR to a project manager's whim.

- Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Kim-Eng [mailto:techwr at genek.com] 
 
So do you work for one or the other of these departments,
or are you just on the outside looking in?  If you report to
the group that says it requires it, just write it and make it 
the introductory chapters of the product's functional spec,
or whatever the first requirements doc that department
has ownership of.

Gene Kim-Eng


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Barrow" <vrfour at verizon.net>

> Again, in a circumstance in which a tech writer was trying to push best
> practices this would be a good rule, but this isn't my case.
> 
> Specifically, I'm talking about a Project Management Office saying "We
don't
> need no stinking requirements" and an Architecture Department saying "We
> can't build it without requirements."  Even more specifically, the
> Architecture Department cannot measure nor report any successes
(milestones)
> without the requirements.