[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"blog-post-grading-requirement-confidence-en":3,"blog-related-grading-requirement-confidence-en":29,"blog-adjacent-grading-requirement-confidence-en":60},{"id":4,"slug":5,"title":6,"excerpt":7,"content":8,"cover":9,"tone":10,"author":11,"publishedAt":12,"updatedAt":12,"readingMinutes":13,"featured":14,"tags":15,"category":19,"seoSettings":28},50,"grading-requirement-confidence","Grading the Confidence Behind Requirements","Treating requirements as facts is the most common cause of delay. Requirements differ in how reliable they are.","\u003Cp>When a client says users will definitely use a feature, that carries very different weight from saying the feature follows their existing approval policy. The first is a guess, the second a constraint. Yet requirement documents often write both in the same tone.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Three levels of confidence\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Certain: driven by policy, contract or regulation, such as invoice formats and approval levels.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Likely: supported by historical data or current operations, such as how many transactions the current system handles daily.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Assumption: based on judgement or industry habit and needing validation, such as users being willing to fill in this form.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>How to use the grades\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Certain items go straight into planning. Assumptions get a minimal test, such as releasing to a single department.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Label each item in the document and spend review time on the assumptions, because that is where the risk sits.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Admitting uncertainty is professional. Treating uncertainty as certainty is not. Grading puts effort where judgement is actually needed.\u003C\u002Fp>","","indigo","佳益方圆团队","2026-10-15T09:00:00+08:00",1,false,[16,17,18],"Requirements","Product","Risk",{"id":20,"parentId":21,"slug":22,"name":23,"description":24,"icon":25,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":4,"count":21},2,0,"product-thinking","Product Thinking","Requirement analysis, user experience and product design methods, plus the thinking from business problems to product solutions.","lightbulb","blue","article",{},[30,40,49],{"id":20,"slug":31,"title":32,"excerpt":33,"content":9,"cover":9,"tone":10,"author":11,"publishedAt":34,"updatedAt":35,"readingMinutes":13,"featured":14,"tags":36,"category":39},"vertical-product-rules","The Watershed for Vertical Products: Writing Industry Defaults into the System","Vertical is not a new industry label on a generic product. The real barrier is understanding and carrying the default rules that practitioners take for granted.","2026-10-09T10:00:00+08:00","2026-10-18T15:58:14.661+08:00",[37,38],"Industry Products","Product Design",{"id":20,"parentId":21,"slug":22,"name":23,"description":24,"icon":25,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":4,"count":21},{"id":41,"slug":42,"title":43,"excerpt":44,"content":9,"cover":9,"tone":26,"author":11,"publishedAt":45,"updatedAt":45,"readingMinutes":13,"featured":14,"tags":46,"category":48},51,"mvp-boundary","Drawing the Boundary of an MVP","Minimum viable is not the fewest features; it is one complete business loop running end to end.","2026-10-03T10:13:00+08:00",[47,17,16],"MVP",{"id":20,"parentId":21,"slug":22,"name":23,"description":24,"icon":25,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":4,"count":21},{"id":50,"slug":51,"title":52,"excerpt":53,"content":9,"cover":9,"tone":54,"author":11,"publishedAt":55,"updatedAt":55,"readingMinutes":13,"featured":14,"tags":56,"category":59},52,"user-interview-questions","Three Questions Worth Asking in User Interviews","Asking what people want yields imagination; asking what they did last time yields facts.","teal","2026-09-21T11:26:00+08:00",[57,58,17],"Research","Interviews",{"id":20,"parentId":21,"slug":22,"name":23,"description":24,"icon":25,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":4,"count":21},{"previous":61,"next":78},{"id":13,"slug":62,"title":63,"excerpt":64,"content":9,"cover":9,"tone":65,"author":11,"publishedAt":66,"updatedAt":67,"readingMinutes":20,"featured":68,"tags":69,"category":72},"why-enterprise-systems-age","Why Enterprise Systems Start to Age After Three Years","A system can pass acceptance with every feature checked, then feel awkward three years later. The problem is rarely the code — it is the changes that were never considered at delivery.","cyan","2026-10-16T09:30:00+08:00","2026-10-18T15:58:14.648+08:00",true,[70,71],"System Evolution","Architecture",{"id":13,"parentId":21,"slug":73,"name":74,"description":75,"icon":76,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":77,"count":21},"engineering","Engineering","Hands-on engineering practices in architecture, performance optimization, AI integration and cross-platform delivery from our R and D team.","cpu",60,{"id":79,"slug":80,"title":81,"excerpt":82,"content":9,"cover":9,"tone":10,"author":11,"publishedAt":83,"updatedAt":83,"readingMinutes":13,"featured":14,"tags":84,"category":88},70,"gov-project-acceptance","Retrospective: Why Acceptance Took Half a Year","The system was live for months while acceptance stalled. The causes were documents, process and communication, not software.","2026-10-13T09:00:00+08:00",[85,86,87],"Retrospective","Government","Acceptance",{"id":89,"parentId":21,"slug":90,"name":91,"description":92,"icon":93,"cover":9,"tone":26,"kind":27,"sortOrder":94,"count":21},3,"project-retrospective","Project Retrospectives","Real project records from zero to one, covering problems, solutions, lessons learned and final outcomes.","clipboard-check",40]