5 Comments
| 2 |
This is interesting. Virtually all our large healthcare software vendors still utilize Excel exclusively for eliciting, communicating and tracking system implementation requirements. And I've often wondered why they don’t use something more customized or sophisticated, even on larger projects.
It is well known that Excel is "le bien-aimé", for its inherent cognitive simplicity and understandability. At the most basic level it appeals to a collective psyche of "list-makers", to that most basic instinct of what a lot of people tend to do when trying to determine and remember what they need/want. It is very available and easily scalable, in a sense. That apparent easy scalability is of course a problem and trap as well. Too easy to just add a sheet or add rows/cols. without a proper level of semantic linking, as it seems Joy experienced – my sympathies!
Like any requirements tool Excel can be misused and misunderstood, as clearly pointed out here. But is it simply because the higher level, dedicated electronic tools for reqs. processes are not as available, accessible, understandable, economical or easily scalable?
Perhaps the more sophisticated tools may not support simple, flexible-format and agile communication, sharing and discourse quite so well? And sounds like a critical req. for reqs. processes tools is – ironically- the ready ability to export back to Excel (or Word)?
Or maybe it is a case of control, the “I want complete ownership and control over my data” syndrome, for reqs. in this case. We see a lot of that in healthcare. I think that is why we still see Excel ALL over, including Reqs. procs and beyond, and will for some time ? So the tips here are well heeded.
| 3 |
I agree that lack of requirements management was a problem, but so was lack of a good tool. For three months the client did not have a better tool. Don't blame them for using what they had.
| 4 |
Excel — and I assume Caliber, I don't know — makes it easy to treat requirements as discrete entities, to track them as in and out of scope for a particular release, etc. Word makes it easy to show requirements in context with each other and with explanatory material such as use cases, diagrams, etc. Those two uses are somewhat in contradiction. How does Caliber stack up in that regard?
| 5 |
I'd actually argue that many times lists that start out in Excel frequently need to be moved to more collaborative mechanisms. The standalone spreadsheet really isn't meant for collaboration but Excel is in many ways a victim of its success. People love it so much (as do I) that they are often loathe to embrace something different, something foreign.
Leave a Reply
The message I take away from this story is the importance of good requirements management practices – traceability, etc. It seems that the key issue of the team that replaced you for 3 months wasn't so much their reliance on excel as their lack of requirements management.