Skip to content
Requirements Dialogue
DEEN

Theses

The short versions of this series appear in parallel on LinkedIn; the long ones are here.

Every development method can be measured against three things: how expensive coordination between the people involved is, how much you really know about the requirements in advance, and how expensive it is to keep the whole thing consistent while it grows. Waterfall was not fundamentally wrong about this, only without a tool for the third point. Scrum solved the first point by making the third one worse. AI changes these three things very differently — and that is exactly what explains why a third way is becoming possible right now. The six articles below work this out in detail.

The articles

  1. Part 1

    Why Scrum is reaching its real end in the age of AI

    Scrum was never invented because small steps are beautiful. It was invented because people cannot coordinate fast enough — and that particular problem is disappearing right now.

  2. Part 2

    The problem SAFe does not solve, because it solves the wrong one

    SAFe is often mentioned in the same breath as Scrum. Its structural flaw, however, is a different one — and it shows very precisely where it leads to answer a coordination problem with even more coordination.

  3. Part 3

    Three axes every methodology has to be measured against

    Waterfall, Scrum, SAFe, the spiral model — all four solve the same three problems, weighted differently and with differing success. Separate the three axes and it becomes immediately clear why the debate between the methods is usually the wrong debate.

  4. Part 4

    What eight months of building alone teach that no theory can say

    A framework on paper is convincing as long as nobody tries to actually build with it. What happens when you run your own methodology against a real project for eight months — and what actually went wrong along the way.

  5. Part 5

    A tool takes shape that checks its own methodology against itself

    Requirements Dialogue is not a theory waiting for an application. It is taking shape directly on a tool built by its own rules — while those rules are still being sharpened.

  6. Part 6

    Who wants to be the first to test it?

    Five articles of theory and practice now lie behind this series. The last one is neither — it is an invitation.

Alongside the series there is a standalone deep dive: how CCIDE actually works, as a process rather than an argument. To the deep dive →