Design time to restrain the impulse

It was thought that idioms such as loose, managernent and fit were only suitable for describing the IQ of animals. With a rational brain, humans will never make these low-level mistakes. But after leaving school really contact with the reality of society, various experiences often let me feel, these ancestors condensed out of the essence can be lasting new, it is because they come from the real life around you and me.

The words that often appear in the brain recently are "to take over", meaning that the person presiding over the sacrificial vessel to arrange catering for the chef, often used to metaphor beyond their own responsibility to interfere in other people's jurisdiction. In modern society, one cannot master all technology. So the best way is to make a social division of labor, everyone needs to master a technology, and then collaborate with others. However, this pattern of division and coordination is too idealistic. Because in real life, team members tend to be less content and exert influence over others. Thus, the internal friction is heavy.

Individuals in the team, although only part of the responsibility, but more or less will be expected to work results of collaborators. When someone else's work is biased against their expectations, they will be dissatisfied and don't spit it out. Product designers feel that the interactive drawing of the wireframe and the dream of the product is too much, the interaction that the product provides the demand is not reliable, only consider business needs and KPIs;

The feelings of distrust are escalating, and your hands are stretching longer. When the product needs to be brought directly on the wireframe, only the interaction between the control to the neat; the interaction struggles to resist the unreliable demand, only grinding the mouth is not cooperating; developing the algorithm that does not want to write too much brain. Everyone wants to make the product the way they want it to, to influence areas that are not part of their expertise, and to squeeze others into their decisions. Why does a cooperative dream become a nightmare of internal friction?

The reason is that the way of cooperation is not reliable. The common mode of cooperation in the company is waterfall. The people of each position form an assembly line, a link of the task is completed, the output of the delivery, to the next link of the person to continue processing.

Ideally, each link should be delivered to the downstream of a "effect" description of the document, downstream collaborators to display their talent, for these "effects" to provide "solutions." However, the actual situation is downstream complained "effect" is not reliable, upstream complained that "solution" is not standard. Confidence in the collapse of disappointment, so the next time to describe the "effect" would like to entrainment chat, their preferred "solution" directly to the partners. However, such a piecemeal approach is very inefficient, damaging the division mechanism and attacking the enthusiasm of the partners, but not the root causes.

In order to eliminate these internal friction and restrain the impulse of the other, we need to optimize the coordinated mode of pipelining:

1, the downstream should be involved in the upstream decision-making in advance:

Upstream should be in the preliminary idea of the effect to invite the downstream to participate in the discussion to see if there is a very unreliable point, lest oneself a person to go too far. Of course, downstream should also understand that at this time they are just staff, only the right to suggest, do not show too strong. In this way, upstream can understand the partner's capabilities and work habits, downstream can also participate in decision-making, the final product has a sense of familiarity, more like a child born together, rather than just a party B.

2, to provide downstream "effect" diagram, but also to account for its background

When delivering an "effect" document, it can also be accompanied by an explanation of why. Know the reason why, you can let downstream of the "effect map" has a deeper understanding, but also in thinking of "solution" when there is more flexibility to play space.

3, the delivery of documents to the detailed definition of "effect" of all the details, the way to express to facilitate the downstream understanding

The individual has a clear idea of what's in his head, so it doesn't matter when the details of the document are flawed. For example, "This icon is temporary use," "point here is to judge the jump again." But for the collaborators who read this document, it is as if a visitor to a new place in the first place would take every pixel on the map as truth. Instead of doing a good job in the collaborators after the "This is not the effect I want", not as serious as their own, to ensure that each delivery to the downstream details are correct. Even if you are too lazy to speak clearly, how can you ask others to guess what effect you want?

The impulse to do so stems from mistrust of the ability of others. It is better to listen to other people's opinions as early as possible than to control them to the absolute, and to manage their own stalls responsibly. The more you ask for others, the less breathing space you give to others, and the less surprises you will receive.

Article Source: xuexiao.me reprint Please indicate the source link.