Today at Open Source Bridge, Amye Scavarda and I co-presented a session on Thinking Like a Pirate (aka creating solid requirements docs, and how requirements docs help projects succeed).
Our slides are available here:
(As an aside, for those of you who don't know about Open Source Bridge, I'm glad you asked! It's an awesome, open source focused conference that occurs yearly in Portland, Oregon. Read more on their site.)
In our session, we fielded a question about some of the specific tools we use to build requirements docs. One of the things we use is an intake survey focused on design-related topics, and a participant asked if we'd be willing to share it out, to which I replied, "Sure!"
Which in turn meant I needed to make it pretty.
Intake surveys are incredibly useful tools. We generally use them as a way to start communication rolling on a project, and as a way of accomplishing some or all of the following goals:
- Learn about the organization's design aesthetic and needs;
- Begin to define a common vocabulary for web design and development;
- Start the conversations about the relationship between design, site architecture, and user experience;
- Begin to create the relationship between the communication leads for both stakeholders;
- Get a sense of the level of research that has gone into the project prior to beginning development; and
- Get a sense of how the organization responds to requests for information.
Below, I have included the general questions and structure of our intake survey. We vary the questions depending on the nature of the project; for example, if there is no desire to incorporate content rating, we don't ask the client to look at sites that feature content rating.
Design Elements
The following questions ask you to look at specific elements of web
pages. For each element, pick out 2-3 sites with the following elements
you like, and one site you dislike.
Logo
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Header Graphic
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Primary Navigation Links
The primary navigation links are generally located at the top of the
screen/page
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Navigation Buttons
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Navigation Menus
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Sidebar Blocks
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Footer
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Font
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
User Dashboard/Profile
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Functionality/Workflows
User Registration Workflow
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Content Rating Workflow
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Content Creation Workflow
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://third.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
Web Sites
The previous section required an examination of different elements of
a web site in isolation. This section asks you to look at all of the
elements as they work together in the web site.
Two sites that just stand out as good
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
2 sites that are just painful to look at
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (2-3 sentences) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (2-3 sentences)
2 sites that are comparable to what you’d like to build
Compare the sites that are similar/related to what you would like to
accomplish. Highlight the similarities and differences, and how your
organizations approach/goals/emphasis compares to the sites included
below.
- http://first.link.to.site |
brief explanation (1-2 paragraphs) - http://second.link.to.site
| brief explanation (1-2 paragraphs)
If you have requirements capture methodologies or resources that have been effective for you, please share them, either on your blog or in the comments. The means by which software development occurs should evolve over time, and we love hearing about how other people are solving similar issues.
Comments
Thank you
Thank you for putting this up. I really appreciate it and will use it heavily in the future.
Post new comment