I like that you're treating ambiguity as the real problem rather than poor documentation.
Most project issues don't happen because clients refuse to provide requirements—they happen because both sides think they understand the same words differently. Turning vague requirements into shared understanding before work begins is a much more valuable outcome than generating another brief.
Good to see you here too. You're pointing at the same distinction you raised before, and I think you're right that it matters more than I initially treated it.
The interview format actually leans toward the shared-understanding side more than a document ever could, since the client is being asked follow-up questions in the moment their picture is still forming, not reviewing something after the fact. But I'll be honest, the current output is still a document at the end. Whether that document is enough to carry the shared understanding forward, or whether the value is really in the conversation itself and the brief is just a receipt of it, is something I'm still thinking through.
That's the part I found myself thinking about as well.
I have a perspective on where that distinction could lead over time, but it's probably easier to explain properly than to compress into a thread.
If you'd find it useful, what's the best email to reach you on?
About
I kept fighting with clients over vague briefs after the work was done. ReqBrief interviews the client before building starts, so the ambiguity gets caught early instead of causing a dispute later.
3 Comments
I like that you're treating ambiguity as the real problem rather than poor documentation.
Most project issues don't happen because clients refuse to provide requirements—they happen because both sides think they understand the same words differently. Turning vague requirements into shared understanding before work begins is a much more valuable outcome than generating another brief.
Good to see you here too. You're pointing at the same distinction you raised before, and I think you're right that it matters more than I initially treated it.
The interview format actually leans toward the shared-understanding side more than a document ever could, since the client is being asked follow-up questions in the moment their picture is still forming, not reviewing something after the fact. But I'll be honest, the current output is still a document at the end. Whether that document is enough to carry the shared understanding forward, or whether the value is really in the conversation itself and the brief is just a receipt of it, is something I'm still thinking through.
That's the part I found myself thinking about as well.
I have a perspective on where that distinction could lead over time, but it's probably easier to explain properly than to compress into a thread.
If you'd find it useful, what's the best email to reach you on?