For example, between 2011 and 2020 the Product Backlog items lost the estimate: it means that if that feature is late it is the fault of a struggling developer, not of a superficial planner.
As far as I can see the article doesn't define these terms. Does anyone know what they mean in this context? Aren't "output" and "outcome" just two words for the same thing within the context of a software project to implement a feature or make a change?
- Output: what you produce, the features, bugfixes, documentation whatever
- Outcome: the actual value for the stakeholders. You could build one hugely important feature which would make the stakeholders love you but the output is still just 1.
It astounds me how many companies I’ve witnessed that loose sight of this and end up building feature after feature without even knowing if it’s having a positive (or negative!) impact.
I really like this approach, but a challenge I’ve encountered is successfully trying to measure that outcome and attribute it to the changes (outputs) that your team is making- either because their might be some lead time between output and outcome, or because you’re in a large organization with so many other teams making changes that might also be impacting the outcome you’re aiming to achieve.
Doesn't really matter what the book says when both places and consultants en masse say it is B and not A.
