If you have read my last two blog posts Part 1 (Conceptual Model) and Part 2 (Rough Concept), you can already imagine what this blog will be about. This time we will go into the contents and artifacts of the detailed concept and deepen them.
Contents & Artifacts of a Detailed Concept
When developing the detailed concept, we build on the contents of the rough concept and answer the following questions:
- Based on the functional requirements: Which user interfaces are needed for which channels and how do we design them?
- Based on the functional requirements and process visualizations: Which part of the business logic must be mapped in the digital solution in the form of software?
- Based on the solution architecture: Which systems are connected and how does the interface work in detail?
In answering these questions, we always look at the solution from the three perspectives of our model of thought already mentioned and develop artifacts that serve these perspectives. In most cases, these are the following artifacts:
- High fidelity prototypes and visual designs (customer and business perspective)
- Detailed specification of functional and functional requirements (business and technology perspective)
- Development and description of the Software architecture incl. data and interface modeling (Technology Perspective)
Interaction of conception and implementation
As mentioned in the last blog post , in the early phases of a project, it is not yet relevant for us which methodology will be used to approach the implementation later. This changes in our approach with the development of the detailed concept. Here we know two variants:
- Classic procedure (e.g. after waterfall)
- Agile approach (e.g. according to Scrum or Kanban)
The above-mentioned content and artifacts are necessary for both variants, but depending on the procedure, we distinguish the interaction between conception and implementation.
In the classic approach, e.g. according to waterfall, the detailed concept for the entire scope of the implementation is first developed and approved from a technical point of view and then from a technical point of view. Only then will the technical implementation begin.
The agile approach, on the other hand, allows a certain parallelization of conception and implementation work. The difference to the waterfall approach is shown in the following figure.
Challenges during the detailed design
When it comes to detailed conception, the challenges listed in the last blog post usually remain:
- Unclear responsibilities at organizational and project level
- Insufficiently developed strategic content and preliminary considerations
- Access and availability of know-how carriers on the customer side
- Lack of involvement of all relevant stakeholders
In addition, the following challenges are often added to the detailed elaboration:
- Lack of stability in the project team
- Changing requirements
- Insufficient flow of information and communication
- Interaction and Dependencies between Conception and Implementation
These challenges must also be addressed in a structured way so that the available project resources (personnel, time and budget) are used optimally and the project achieves the set goals.
In the concluding “Bonus Track” of this blog series, I explain which measures we use to meet these challenges in the conception phase (rough and detailed conception).