I do believe it is beneficial to provide more specificity to the existing principles.
I’m currently thinking through a proposal to share with the community. My belief is that we doctrine today is very much in “custom” and in order for it to get to “product” we need some sort of way to structure the doctrine data. Skimming through the video, there is no way I can do any of that without Steve. Which, to me, really highlights the “custom” nature of doctrine.
Consider structuring all the doctrine content by “category”, “principle”, and “practice”. Taking your elaboration as an example:
Principle: Know your users
Practice: Know who are your users
Look at transactions over last x years. Pareto filter it and group into recognisable buckets of users
Principle: Know your users
Practice: Know what they are trying to achieve
- what is their “official” purpose (f.e. reduce unemployment, help their customers)?
- what drives them (bonuses, return on investment, challenge, inertia )?
- if they are driven by other users (f.e. the board put under pressure by investors), you have to understand both groups, and their options
Each one of these snippets can be a categorized piece of doctrine. If I come up with something useful in my area of expertise and I allocate Category, Principle, and Practice to it, then it becomes useful for others as a snippet. I imagine being able to search doctrine for Category:Development AND Principle:Know Your Users and all the practices with their associated content being avialable.
Having that little bit of structure would go a long way in not needing a guide/consultant to learn and apply doctrine little by little. I do realize the audience however and Blockbuster/Netflix analogy comes to mind.
As to varying from company to other company. With the snippet structure, that’s fine, mix and match the practices you want for your principle, skip what doesn’t apply and keep what does. It allows for tayloring to specific user needs without having everything being custom made each time. I can imagine Steve having a set of snippets, LEF having a set of snippets, HiredThought having a set of snippets, and people being able to mix and match those. I belive that would begin to shove doctrine into the product phase of evolution.
edit: I realize I gave examples of short snippets. But these don’t need to be short. It can be a whole book, for example:
Principle: Focus on user needs
Practice: Conduct user needs research
See A Beginner’s Guide to Finding User Needs
or a video… etc etc.
edit 2: … taking a hint from “microdata” format… this can be called “microdoctrine”
edit 3: Given a sequence (the phases I proposed, updated as needed) and a repository of microdoctrine, it seems that I could discover for myself what practice to try and what practice to skip, and overall start my crawl toward adopting more doctrine principles, with more practices.