In this section we talk about the risks involved in holding an AAD, and what, if anything, can be done to minimize them. Each risk is listed and then a possible action that could be taken.
-
You end up with the wrong people. Say, for example, there's a senior decision-maker missing. Probably the most serious thing that can happen. If this does happen to you, you need to kill the AAD session immediately. Careful preparation should reduce the risk of it happening.
-
Group think. This is where the group gets so caught up in the AAD that ideas which aren't very good or even downright wrong are accepted and used. Try to pick attendees whose personalities are such that this probably wouldn't happen.
-
Foul up previously good relationship with users or marketing if the AAD doesn't deliver. No solution!
-
Risk to one's own career if the AAD doesn't deliver. No solution. Good luck!
-
Insufficient time in an AAD for subconscious problem solving. Sometimes we do our best work away from the office where we can often come up with highly creative solutions to problems. An AAD doesn't really give us this luxury. This risk is offset to some extent by the synergistic effect of the AAD.
-
Expectations not satisfied; particularly those of upper management. Clearly, these need to be set correctly. That's where the idea of the mini-seminar is very useful.
-
The standards, or quality assurance, or quality control department, view the procedure with suspicion, and slow down the procedure by insisting that all their standard stuff be done in addition to the output from the AAD.
-
Some standards (e.g. document sign-offs) are there because they assume a traditional requirements and design life cycle. That is to say, many of them are based on a put-down/pick-up approach. For an AAD-type approach, the standards should probably be revisited and altered to reflect the AAD way of working.
-
Corporate or country culture. The hours and/or emotional intensity involved in an AAD may not suit every company. No solution!
-
Part way into the AAD, the project is found to be too big so that the expected results cannot now be achieved in the timeframe. Produce less of the deliverables or else take one chunk of the system down to the promised level of detail.
-
Can't come to a consensus. A problem. Your best bet is that this effect can be offset by the feeling of people working together towards a common goal.
-
Not much time in an AAD for tact. Yes, there isn't!
-
Anti-climax/let-down after the AAD is over. Create a post AAD-session job list so that there is natural follow-on from it.
-
Requirements get missed. Yes, but this risk also exists in the traditional approach.
