Honestly speaking, running through the list of Raw Feedback is incredibly boring and taxing. After 2.5 hours I was done but mentally exhausted.
On a side note, I wonder how “triage” came to be used in software development. Maybe a doctor decided to code?
I’m doing good so far on my first week of a new workflow, having triaged the list of Raw Feedback and assigning follow-ups:
- Ask – to clarify with the respective stakeholder on what the stories and/or requirements entail. Either the stuff is too broad (needs further definition), or too specific (I don’t know or can’t remember the why)
- Quantify – I know the why and the requirements (or at least enough for healthy discussion with the devs) but need to know how big an issue it is for prioritization (or determine whether it goes to long-term parking)
- Refine – I know the why, but need to think through implementation, possibly to propose something to the stakeholder.
- Long-term Parking – Possibly of use in the future, but not relevant enough at the moment
- Graveyard – Rejected stuff, either because it has become irrelevant, or is not worth the effort
One challenge I find is that feedback often comes in the form of a feature request, when really we should be asking about the user story. So, the next piece of working (and probably the more tiring one) is to ask.