Does anyone else take issue with this process?
It strikes me as not being agile, and rather more of an iter-fall approach.
I find that if design and development teams are truly close and communicating well, design iteration should happen at the same time as production code prototyping.
Just like no battle-plan completely survives the enemy, even an Invision prototyped and validated design won't necessarily work as well in practice, and often new insights and ideas come from the actual implementation process.
I find I often get much better results and faster if more of these steps happen simultaneously and with lots of back-and-forth rather than one happening after another.
Hey Mattan, I agree. This isn't truly agile or truly waterfall, but somewhere in the middle.
Due to our current process (where we focus on several big features per release) there is a lot of iteration at the design and discovery phase which involves engineering leads. Sometimes this will include coded prototypes to validate things work as intended.
Once we move into the "develop" phase, you're right we continue to learn more and have to make changes, but we have hopefully massively decreased the risk of big changes at this point. Often during development, depending on the project, we'll have several micro design iterations.
Great to hear, and thank you for going into more detail!
I have a strong belief in breaking down the borders between design and development, so it is great to see more companies figuring out how to go about it in the best way.
This is a great resource. Thanks!