182 lines
8.5 KiB
Markdown
182 lines
8.5 KiB
Markdown
# Advanced Elicitation Methods for Enterprise Development
|
|
|
|
## Core Reflective Methods
|
|
|
|
### Expand or Contract for Audience
|
|
**Purpose**: Tailor content complexity for specific stakeholders
|
|
- Ask whether to 'expand' (add detail, elaborate) or 'contract' (simplify, clarify)
|
|
- Identify specific target audience: executives, developers, users, compliance
|
|
- Adjust technical depth and terminology accordingly
|
|
- Ensure appropriate level of detail for decision-making needs
|
|
|
|
### Explain Reasoning (Chain of Thought)
|
|
**Purpose**: Make decision processes transparent and reviewable
|
|
- Walk through step-by-step thinking process from agent's perspective
|
|
- Reveal underlying assumptions and decision points
|
|
- Show how conclusions were reached using domain expertise
|
|
- Enable others to follow and validate the reasoning
|
|
|
|
### Critique and Refine
|
|
**Purpose**: Improve quality through systematic review
|
|
- Review output for flaws, inconsistencies, or improvement areas
|
|
- Identify specific weaknesses from role's expertise perspective
|
|
- Suggest refined version incorporating domain knowledge
|
|
- Apply quality standards and best practices
|
|
|
|
## Structural Analysis Methods
|
|
|
|
### Analyze Logical Flow and Dependencies
|
|
**Purpose**: Ensure coherent and implementable solutions
|
|
- Examine content structure for logical progression
|
|
- Check internal consistency and coherence across sections
|
|
- Identify and validate dependencies between components
|
|
- Confirm effective ordering and sequencing of steps
|
|
|
|
### Assess Alignment with Overall Goals
|
|
**Purpose**: Maintain strategic focus and business alignment
|
|
- Evaluate how content contributes to stated objectives
|
|
- Identify any misalignments or gaps in goal achievement
|
|
- Interpret alignment from specific role's perspective
|
|
- Suggest adjustments to better serve business outcomes
|
|
|
|
## Risk and Challenge Methods
|
|
|
|
### Identify Potential Risks and Unforeseen Issues
|
|
**Purpose**: Proactive risk management and mitigation planning
|
|
- Brainstorm potential risks from role's specific expertise
|
|
- Identify overlooked edge cases or failure scenarios
|
|
- Anticipate unintended consequences of proposed solutions
|
|
- Highlight implementation challenges and complexity issues
|
|
|
|
### Challenge from Critical Perspective
|
|
**Purpose**: Stress-test solutions through adversarial thinking
|
|
- Adopt critical stance on current content and proposals
|
|
- Play devil's advocate from specified stakeholder viewpoint
|
|
- Argue against proposal highlighting significant weaknesses
|
|
- Apply YAGNI principles for scope trimming when appropriate
|
|
|
|
## Creative Exploration Methods
|
|
|
|
### Tree of Thoughts Deep Dive
|
|
**Purpose**: Systematic exploration of solution alternatives
|
|
- Break problem into discrete "thoughts" or intermediate steps
|
|
- Explore multiple reasoning paths simultaneously
|
|
- Use self-evaluation to classify each path: "confident", "likely", "uncertain"
|
|
- Apply search algorithms (breadth-first/depth-first) for optimal solutions
|
|
|
|
### Hindsight Analysis: "If Only..." Reflection
|
|
**Purpose**: Learn from potential future scenarios
|
|
- Imagine retrospective scenario based on current content
|
|
- Identify the critical "if only we had known/done X..." insight
|
|
- Describe imagined consequences and their impact
|
|
- Extract actionable learnings for current context and planning
|
|
|
|
## Multi-Perspective Collaboration Methods
|
|
|
|
### Agile Team Perspective Shift
|
|
**Purpose**: Comprehensive evaluation from all team viewpoints
|
|
- **Product Owner**: Focus on user value and business impact assessment
|
|
- **Scrum Master**: Examine process flow and team dynamics concerns
|
|
- **Developer**: Assess technical implementation complexity and feasibility
|
|
- **QA**: Identify testing scenarios and quality assurance concerns
|
|
- **UX Designer**: Evaluate user experience and accessibility implications
|
|
|
|
### Stakeholder Round Table
|
|
**Purpose**: Balanced consideration of all stakeholder interests
|
|
- Convene virtual meeting with multiple persona perspectives
|
|
- Each persona contributes unique viewpoint on content impact
|
|
- Identify conflicts and synergies between different viewpoints
|
|
- Synthesize insights into actionable recommendations and compromises
|
|
|
|
### Meta-Analysis of Approach
|
|
**Purpose**: Optimize the problem-solving methodology itself
|
|
- Step back to analyze structure and logic of current approach
|
|
- Question the format and methodology being used for the task
|
|
- Suggest alternative frameworks or mental models that might work better
|
|
- Optimize the elicitation and analysis process itself
|
|
|
|
## Advanced Enterprise Techniques
|
|
|
|
### Self-Consistency Validation
|
|
**Purpose**: Increase reliability through multiple validation paths
|
|
- Generate multiple reasoning paths for the same problem
|
|
- Compare consistency across different analytical approaches
|
|
- Identify most reliable and robust solution among alternatives
|
|
- Highlight areas where approaches diverge and investigate why
|
|
|
|
### Reasoning Without External Dependencies
|
|
**Purpose**: Efficient problem-solving using available knowledge
|
|
- Separate pure reasoning from tool-based or external research actions
|
|
- Create reasoning plan without external dependencies or data needs
|
|
- Identify what can be solved through existing knowledge and logic
|
|
- Optimize for efficiency and reduced complexity
|
|
|
|
### Persona-Pattern Hybrid Analysis
|
|
**Purpose**: Deep domain-specific analysis with structured methodology
|
|
- **Architect + Risk Analysis**: Deep technical risk assessment with mitigation
|
|
- **UX Expert + User Journey**: End-to-end experience critique and optimization
|
|
- **PM + Stakeholder Analysis**: Multi-perspective impact review and prioritization
|
|
- **QA + Test Strategy**: Comprehensive quality assurance planning and validation
|
|
|
|
### Emergent Collaboration Discovery
|
|
**Purpose**: Capture unexpected insights from multi-agent thinking
|
|
- Allow multiple perspectives to naturally emerge without forcing
|
|
- Identify unexpected insights from persona interactions and conflicts
|
|
- Explore novel combinations of viewpoints for innovative solutions
|
|
- Capture serendipitous discoveries from collaborative reasoning
|
|
|
|
## Game-Based Elicitation Methods
|
|
|
|
### Red Team vs Blue Team
|
|
**Purpose**: Adversarial testing of solutions and strategies
|
|
- **Red Team**: Attack the proposal, find vulnerabilities and weaknesses
|
|
- **Blue Team**: Defend and strengthen the approach with improvements
|
|
- Competitive analysis reveals blind spots and assumptions
|
|
- Results in more robust, battle-tested solutions
|
|
|
|
### Innovation Tournament
|
|
**Purpose**: Systematic evaluation of alternative approaches
|
|
- Pit multiple alternative approaches against each other
|
|
- Score each approach across different evaluation criteria
|
|
- Crowd-source evaluation from different persona perspectives
|
|
- Identify winning combination of features and strategies
|
|
|
|
### Constraint Challenge
|
|
**Purpose**: Creative problem-solving within limitations
|
|
- Present content as constraints to work within effectively
|
|
- Find creative solutions within tight budget/time/resource limitations
|
|
- Identify minimum viable approach that still meets core requirements
|
|
- Discover innovative workarounds and optimization opportunities
|
|
|
|
## Quality Control Methods
|
|
|
|
### Cross-Agent Validation
|
|
**Purpose**: Ensure consistency across different domain perspectives
|
|
- Have multiple agents review from their expertise perspectives
|
|
- Identify inconsistencies between different domain requirements
|
|
- Resolve conflicts through structured negotiation and compromise
|
|
- Ensure final solution satisfies all critical domain constraints
|
|
|
|
### Iterative Refinement Protocol
|
|
**Purpose**: Systematic improvement through structured feedback cycles
|
|
- Present initial solution for structured feedback
|
|
- Apply feedback systematically with clear change tracking
|
|
- Re-evaluate improved solution against original criteria
|
|
- Continue refinement cycles until quality thresholds are met
|
|
|
|
## Implementation Guidelines for Agents
|
|
|
|
**Analyst Agent**: Use perspective shifts, stakeholder analysis, risk identification
|
|
**PM Agent**: Use alignment assessment, priority challenging, stakeholder round tables
|
|
**Architect Agent**: Use technical risk analysis, constraint challenges, alternative exploration
|
|
**Developer Agent**: Use implementation critique, dependency analysis, constraint solving
|
|
**UX Expert Agent**: Use user perspective shifts, journey analysis, accessibility validation
|
|
**QA Agent**: Use risk identification, scenario exploration, validation protocols
|
|
|
|
## Process Control
|
|
|
|
### Proceed Without Further Actions
|
|
**Purpose**: Efficient workflow control and decision finalization
|
|
- Acknowledge choice to finalize current work without additional analysis
|
|
- Accept output as-is and prepare to move to next workflow step
|
|
- Prepare to continue workflow without additional elicitation or refinement |