Digital Product Requirements: Pitfalls & Best Practices

We write, review, and prioritize hundreds of thousands of requirements for all kinds of products and services. The hard-won truth stands out: there’s no such thing as a perfect requirement. At best, user requirements are imperfect representations of a desired outcome. However, a requirement does thrive in a specific context– when the stakeholder is happy with the delivered output and willing to pay for it.

When diagnosing product problems, we often ask to see the requirements and crucially,speak with the teams involved. This often reveals more insights about the process. Here are some common pitfalls we observe, and how to address them:

Common Pitfalls:

• New Team Syndrome: New teams often lean too heavily on formal requirements, using them as a substitute for the essential, sometimes messy, work of building shared understanding and trust. The document becomes a crutch, rather than a communication tool.
  
  

• Physical Distance Problem: Geographically dispersed teams often over-rely on written requirements as the primary communication channel. This lack of face-to-face interaction can lead to misinterpretations, missing context, and a disconnect between stakeholders and developers.
  
  

• The "Telephone”Problem: This classic communication breakdown occurs when stakeholder needs are translated through multiple layers of communicators (stakeholder → product manager → developer). The original intent gets distorted along the way, resulting in a product that misses the mark, even if all the documented requirements were technically "met."

Best Practices:

• Requirements Explain the "What" and the "Why": Focus on the what and the why, not the how. Describe the desired outcome and the rationale behind it. This empowers the development team to leverage their expertise and find the most effective technical solution. Avoid prescribing the how, as this can stifle creativity and quickly lead to outdated requirements.

• Include Visuals: A picture is worth a thousand words. Don't rely solely on text. Include visuals like screenshots, low-fidelity mockups, examples from other applications, or even sketches. Visuals spark conversation, clarify understanding, and help stakeholders visualize the desired outcome. They bridge the gap between abstract requirements and concrete, workable solutions.

• Write Requirements Together: Requirements shouldn't be a solitary activity, nor a single team’s accountability. Collaborate with stakeholders, especially on high-level epics (the business stories, the business requirement documents). This shared creation process builds consensus, surfaces hidden assumptions, and fosters ownership. It also significantly reduces the "telephone problem" by ensuring everyone is on the same page.

• Try Technical Stories (with caution): While some developers initially resist technical stories ("I could code it faster!"), they often provide clarity when used effectively. Technical stories should articulate the ideal technical state, focusing on the why behind technical choices. This can actually reduce code rewrites, a universal developer frustration. The key is to use technical stories to enhance clarity and alignment, not to constrain creativity.

• Review Requirements in Sprint Retrospectives: Requirements shouldn't be static documents. Regularly discuss them in sprint retrospectives. Which requirements facilitated smooth development? Which caused confusion or delays? This feedback loop helps the team learn and continuously refine the requirements process.

• Run Stakeholder Retrospectives: Stakeholder retrospectives are just as vital as team retrospectives. Faster feedback loops enable quicker adaptation and iteration. Showing stakeholders partially completed features, even if unfinished, can be incredibly valuable. It helps them visualize progress, identify potential issues early, and understand the complexities of development. This also manages expectations and explains why some tasks take longer than anticipated.

The Key Takeaway:

Requirements are a tool, not a sacred text. They should facilitate communication and shared understanding, not create rigid prescriptions. Embrace collaboration, focus on the what and the why, leverage the power of visuals, and use retrospectives to continuously review progress and improve your requirements process. Don't chase the illusion of perfect requirements; focus on creating a process that works for your team, your stakeholders, and your product.