This content originally appeared on HackerNoon and was authored by Sanjay Mood
There was a time I believed that if I just wrote a perfect spec—everything would go smoothly.
\ The devs would build exactly what I envisioned.
\ QA wouldn’t miss a thing.
\ The product owner would nod in agreement, and we’d launch on time.
\ That fantasy lasted about two sprints.
I Was Trained to Believe Specs Were Sacred
Back when I started out as a BA, we were taught to treat documentation like gospel.
\ You wrote it all down—every scenario, exception, flow, dropdown option, tooltip. The longer the spec, the more “complete” it was. If it made it to 20 pages? Even better.
\ I once spent three weeks writing a spec for a search filter. No one questioned it. That was just the norm.
Then Agile Happened—And My Confidence Cracked
Agile hit like a cold shower.
\ Suddenly we were in sprint planning talking about “just enough” documentation. Stories were short. Acceptance criteria were lean. My 20-page documents became the elephant in the room no one had time to read.
\ The first few sprints? Painful.
\ Dev asked me things that werealready in the spec.
\ QA missed stuff because they were waiting for a walkthrough I didn’t have time to give.
\ And I kept thinking:“Why is no one reading this?”
\ The truth? They didn’t need to.
\ What they needed wasme, in the room, talking with them—not hiding behind a Google Doc.
My Wake-Up Call Came in a Retro
I’ll never forget this.
\ In a retro, one of the devs (very kindly) said:
\
“We appreciate the effort, but the spec is too much. We’d rather walk through the story with you and get clarity directly.”
\ That one line shifted everything for me.
\ I realized I wasn’t writing specs for them—I was writing them for me. To feel prepared. To feel useful. To prove I was doing my job.
\ But in an Agile world, usefulness doesn’t come from a polished doc. It comes from creating shared understanding.
I Burned the Spec—and Found Something Better
After that retro, I tried something radical.
\ I replaced a full-blown spec with:
- Three user stories
- A sketchy whiteboard diagram
- One 30-min conversation with the team
\ That was it.
\ It felt risky. Like showing up underdressed to a formal party.
\ But the team got it. They asked questions. They suggested ideas. QA chimed in with edge cases I hadn’t thought of.
\ And the feature shipped—faster, better, and with less friction than ever before.
What I Use Now (Instead of Specs)
🧩 User Story Mapping— For seeing the flow, not just the features \n 🧠Personas— To anchor decisions in user goals \n ✅Lean acceptance criteria— So “done” is clear, but not rigid \n 🎤Team conversations — Because no spec beats a 15-min talk
\ And sometimes… \n
I still write things down. But not as a crutch. As a compass.
The Hard Truth: Specs Made Me Feel in Control. But They Weren’t Saving Me.
Specs gave me the illusion of safety.
\ I thought they would shield me from mistakes, misunderstandings, and scope changes. But all they really did was delay reality.
\ What works now is different:
- I talk more. I listen harder.
- I stay involved through delivery, not just at kickoff.
- I let go of perfect. I aim for progress.
Final Thoughts: You Don’t Need a Spec. You Need a Seat at the Table.
If you’re a BA struggling to let go of “the way it used to be,” I get it. I was you.
\ But Agile doesn’t need scribes. It needs connectors.
\ People who create alignment, not attachments.
\ People who know how to lead in a room full of change.
\ So write if you must. But don’t hide behind it.
\ Be the reason the team builds the right thing.
This content originally appeared on HackerNoon and was authored by Sanjay Mood
Sanjay Mood | Sciencx (2025-04-13T09:10:31+00:00) Confession: I Used to Think Specs Were Everything. Agile Broke Me (and Made Me Better). Retrieved from https://www.scien.cx/2025/04/13/confession-i-used-to-think-specs-were-everything-agile-broke-me-and-made-me-better/
Please log in to upload a file.
There are no updates yet.
Click the Upload button above to add an update.