212 lines
7.7 KiB
Markdown
212 lines
7.7 KiB
Markdown
# Inter-Persona Feedback Task
|
|
|
|
## Purpose
|
|
Create systematic feedback loops between BMAD personas to improve handoffs, reduce friction, and optimize the overall workflow through collaborative learning.
|
|
|
|
## When to Execute
|
|
- At each persona transition point in the workflow
|
|
- After completing collaborative phases involving multiple personas
|
|
- When handoff issues or communication problems are identified
|
|
- During periodic methodology optimization reviews
|
|
|
|
## Feedback Loop Framework
|
|
|
|
### 1. Upstream Feedback (To Previous Persona)
|
|
|
|
**Output Quality Assessment:**
|
|
- Was the deliverable complete and accurate for its intended purpose?
|
|
- How well did it address the requirements and constraints provided?
|
|
- What information was missing that would have improved efficiency?
|
|
|
|
**Usability Feedback:**
|
|
- How easy was it to understand and work with the provided deliverable?
|
|
- Were there format, structure, or presentation issues?
|
|
- What would make the handoff smoother and more effective?
|
|
|
|
**Context Transfer Evaluation:**
|
|
- Was sufficient context provided for effective continuation?
|
|
- Were assumptions and decisions clearly documented?
|
|
- What additional background information would have been helpful?
|
|
|
|
### 2. Downstream Feedback (To Next Persona)
|
|
|
|
**Preparation for Handoff:**
|
|
- What does the next persona need to know for optimal performance?
|
|
- Are there specific constraints, preferences, or requirements to highlight?
|
|
- What potential issues or challenges should be anticipated?
|
|
|
|
**Quality Expectations:**
|
|
- What level of detail and completeness is expected in outputs?
|
|
- Are there specific formats or structures that work best?
|
|
- What are the most common issues to avoid in deliverables?
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria Communication:**
|
|
- How will the next persona know they've successfully completed their phase?
|
|
- What validation or review processes should be followed?
|
|
- Who are the key stakeholders for approval or feedback?
|
|
|
|
### 3. Collaborative Improvement Opportunities
|
|
|
|
**Workflow Optimization:**
|
|
- Which steps in the handoff process could be streamlined?
|
|
- Are there redundant activities that could be eliminated?
|
|
- Where could parallel work or collaboration improve efficiency?
|
|
|
|
**Communication Enhancement:**
|
|
- What communication patterns work best between these personas?
|
|
- How can misunderstandings or ambiguities be prevented?
|
|
- What information should be shared proactively vs. on-demand?
|
|
|
|
**Tool and Template Improvements:**
|
|
- Which templates or frameworks facilitate better collaboration?
|
|
- What tools or formats improve information transfer?
|
|
- How can deliverable structures be optimized for handoffs?
|
|
|
|
## Persona-Specific Feedback Patterns
|
|
|
|
### Analyst → PM Feedback Loop
|
|
**Analyst Provides:**
|
|
- Quality of project brief for PRD development
|
|
- Completeness of market research and user insights
|
|
- Clarity of problem definition and opportunity sizing
|
|
|
|
**PM Provides:**
|
|
- Effectiveness of brief structure for requirements gathering
|
|
- Missing information that would improve PRD quality
|
|
- Suggestions for research focus areas or methodologies
|
|
|
|
### PM → Architect Feedback Loop
|
|
**PM Provides:**
|
|
- Technical clarity needed in PRD for architecture design
|
|
- Priority ranking effectiveness for architectural decisions
|
|
- Completeness of non-functional requirements
|
|
|
|
**Architect Provides:**
|
|
- PRD clarity for technical planning
|
|
- Feasibility concerns or constraint identification
|
|
- Suggestions for better technical requirement articulation
|
|
|
|
### Architect → Design Architect Feedback Loop
|
|
**Architect Provides:**
|
|
- Technical constraints for frontend design
|
|
- Integration requirements and system boundaries
|
|
- Performance or scalability considerations for UI/UX
|
|
|
|
**Design Architect Provides:**
|
|
- User experience implications of architectural decisions
|
|
- Frontend technical requirements and constraints
|
|
- Suggestions for better architecture-design integration
|
|
|
|
### Design Architect → PO Feedback Loop
|
|
**Design Architect Provides:**
|
|
- UI/UX specification completeness for validation
|
|
- Frontend architecture clarity for story creation
|
|
- Design system requirements and guidelines
|
|
|
|
**PO Provides:**
|
|
- Specification usability for story development
|
|
- Missing details needed for development planning
|
|
- Alignment assessment with overall product vision
|
|
|
|
### PO → SM Feedback Loop
|
|
**PO Provides:**
|
|
- Story quality and implementability assessment
|
|
- Prioritization effectiveness and sequencing logic
|
|
- Validation criteria and acceptance standards
|
|
|
|
**SM Provides:**
|
|
- Story structure effectiveness for development planning
|
|
- Missing details needed for sprint planning
|
|
- Feedback on epic breakdown and story sizing
|
|
|
|
### SM → Dev Feedback Loop
|
|
**SM Provides:**
|
|
- Story clarity and completeness for implementation
|
|
- Context needed for development decisions
|
|
- Success criteria and testing requirements
|
|
|
|
**Dev Provides:**
|
|
- Story implementability and technical feasibility
|
|
- Missing technical details or specifications
|
|
- Suggestions for better story structure and clarity
|
|
|
|
## Feedback Collection Process
|
|
|
|
### 1. Immediate Handoff Feedback
|
|
At each persona transition:
|
|
- Quick assessment of deliverable quality and usability
|
|
- Identification of immediate issues or gaps
|
|
- Communication of urgent concerns or requirements
|
|
|
|
### 2. Phase Completion Feedback
|
|
After completing work with handed-off deliverables:
|
|
- Comprehensive evaluation of input quality and effectiveness
|
|
- Analysis of how inputs affected output quality and efficiency
|
|
- Specific suggestions for improvement
|
|
|
|
### 3. Retrospective Feedback
|
|
During methodology reviews:
|
|
- Pattern analysis across multiple handoffs
|
|
- Identification of systemic issues or improvements
|
|
- Strategic recommendations for workflow optimization
|
|
|
|
## Feedback Implementation
|
|
|
|
### 1. Immediate Corrections
|
|
- Quick fixes to current deliverables if critical issues identified
|
|
- Clarifications or additional information provision
|
|
- Real-time adjustments to approach or focus
|
|
|
|
### 2. Process Improvements
|
|
- Updates to persona instructions based on feedback
|
|
- Template or framework modifications
|
|
- Workflow sequence or timing adjustments
|
|
|
|
### 3. Methodology Evolution
|
|
- Systematic integration of feedback into BMAD framework
|
|
- Documentation of improved practices and patterns
|
|
- Training or guidance updates for persona optimization
|
|
|
|
## Feedback Quality Standards
|
|
|
|
### Constructive Focus
|
|
- Specific, actionable suggestions rather than general criticism
|
|
- Focus on improvement opportunities rather than blame
|
|
- Balance of positive reinforcement with constructive feedback
|
|
|
|
### Evidence-Based
|
|
- Concrete examples of issues or successes
|
|
- Quantified impacts where possible (time, quality, satisfaction)
|
|
- Clear cause-and-effect relationships identified
|
|
|
|
### Forward-Looking
|
|
- Emphasis on preventing future issues
|
|
- Suggestions for process enhancement
|
|
- Contribution to overall methodology improvement
|
|
|
|
## Success Metrics
|
|
|
|
### Handoff Efficiency
|
|
- Reduced time for persona transitions
|
|
- Decreased need for clarification or additional information
|
|
- Improved first-pass success rate for deliverables
|
|
|
|
### Output Quality
|
|
- Higher consistency in deliverable standards
|
|
- Better alignment between persona outputs and requirements
|
|
- Reduced iteration cycles needed for acceptable quality
|
|
|
|
### Collaborative Effectiveness
|
|
- Improved satisfaction ratings for inter-persona collaboration
|
|
- Enhanced understanding of each persona's needs and constraints
|
|
- Better overall workflow integration and smoothness
|
|
|
|
## Integration with Self-Improvement Framework
|
|
|
|
This feedback system directly supports the BMAD framework's evolution by:
|
|
- Creating continuous learning opportunities between personas
|
|
- Identifying optimization opportunities at transition points
|
|
- Providing data for methodology improvement decisions
|
|
- Facilitating collaborative enhancement of the overall system
|
|
|
|
Execute this task consistently to ensure seamless collaboration and continuous improvement across all BMAD personas. |