{
  "author": {
    "name": "Dylan Fitzgerald",
    "url": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/"
  },
  "blyg": "0.4",
  "changelog": [
    {
      "at": "2022-08-02T03:01:00Z",
      "note": "Imported from the Ctrl+Shift archive",
      "version": 1
    }
  ],
  "content_hash": "sha256:a2e076217762aeaf9b91c565d00c82cb3fb02faa444c8a7249b3f128741c5c6b",
  "content_html": "\u003ch1\u003eDefault Do or Default Don\u0026#39;t?\u003c/h1\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen a chunk of work is dropped into your team\u0026rsquo;s workstream\u0026ndash;whether you call it a backlog, or a bucket, or what-have-you\u0026ndash;is the default expectation that your team will do that work? Or is it that the team will \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003econsider\u003c/span\u003e that piece of work for inclusion?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe ends of the continuum in the software world: \u0026ldquo;waterfall\u0026rdquo;, in which everything is pre-planned before starting, is purely default-do. \u003ca href=\"https://basecamp.com/shapeup\"\u003eShape Up\u003c/a\u003e is default-don\u0026rsquo;t: work pitches go to the betting table for evaluation, and only a few get picked up, with no systemic retention for the next time around. Big-A Agile and friends fall somewhere in-between, depending on how you\u0026rsquo;ve adapted them to your team.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe trouble with \u0026ldquo;default-do\u0026rdquo; is that \u003ca href=\"https://dylanfitzgerald.net/blog/before_the_next_yes/\"\u003eevery \u0026ldquo;yes\u0026rdquo; embeds an implicit collection of \u0026ldquo;no\u0026quot;s\u003c/a\u003e, so you\u0026rsquo;re making prioritization decisions implicitly. There may be a discussion around work \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003esequencing\u003c/span\u003e that puts the more important (or, more likely, the more urgent) work ahead in the queue, but the default decision is still to do all the things. It also reduces the quality bar for work definition, shape and scope before being assigned to folks on delivery; the impetus is on the recipient to prove why something isn\u0026rsquo;t ready, rather than on the submitter to prove that something \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eis\u003c/span\u003e ready.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Default don\u0026rsquo;t\u0026rdquo; engenders conversation around whether each thing should be done \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eat all\u003c/span\u003e right now, including whether the work is sufficiently shaped and defined\u0026ndash;and if the answer is \u0026ldquo;no\u0026rdquo;, the impetus is on individual people (and not an automated system) to improve the work definition and re-raise it if they feel it\u0026rsquo;s appropriate in the future.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhere are \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eyour\u003c/span\u003e systems defaulting to an unexamined commitment to work by default?\u003c/p\u003e\n",
  "content_md": "# Default Do or Default Don't?\n\nWhen a chunk of work is dropped into your team's workstream--whether you call it a backlog, or a bucket, or what-have-you--is the default expectation that your team will do that work? Or is it that the team will \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003econsider\u003c/span\u003e that piece of work for inclusion?\n\nThe ends of the continuum in the software world: \"waterfall\", in which everything is pre-planned before starting, is purely default-do. [Shape Up](https://basecamp.com/shapeup) is default-don't: work pitches go to the betting table for evaluation, and only a few get picked up, with no systemic retention for the next time around. Big-A Agile and friends fall somewhere in-between, depending on how you've adapted them to your team.\n\nThe trouble with \"default-do\" is that [every \"yes\" embeds an implicit collection of \"no\"s]({{\u003c relref \"before_the_next_yes\" \u003e}}), so you're making prioritization decisions implicitly. There may be a discussion around work \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003esequencing\u003c/span\u003e that puts the more important (or, more likely, the more urgent) work ahead in the queue, but the default decision is still to do all the things. It also reduces the quality bar for work definition, shape and scope before being assigned to folks on delivery; the impetus is on the recipient to prove why something isn't ready, rather than on the submitter to prove that something \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eis\u003c/span\u003e ready.\n\n\"Default don't\" engenders conversation around whether each thing should be done \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eat all\u003c/span\u003e right now, including whether the work is sufficiently shaped and defined--and if the answer is \"no\", the impetus is on individual people (and not an automated system) to improve the work definition and re-raise it if they feel it's appropriate in the future.\n\nWhere are \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eyour\u003c/span\u003e systems defaulting to an unexamined commitment to work by default?",
  "created": "2022-08-02T03:01:00Z",
  "id": "52dtw8n4n96jrxdvaw8233kdhk",
  "kind": "thread",
  "media": [],
  "origin": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/blyg/",
  "page": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/blog/default-do-or-default-do-not/",
  "transclusions": [],
  "updated": "2022-08-02T03:01:00Z",
  "version": 1
}