This blog post has been adapted from this Tech Talk by Matt Cross, Lead Business Analyst at Audacia.
Successful software projects are rarely the result of chance. They emerge from a disciplined approach to understanding the problem, structuring requirements and aligning teams. These same principles – clarity of vision, scope control and collaboration – are as essential to replacing a medieval Lego castle as they are to delivering a complex software system.
This article explores three core challenges in defining effective system requirements:
- Stacking Wisely – Managing Scope and Priorities
- The Picture on the Box – Visualising Requirements
- All Hands on Bricks – Engaging Stakeholders
1. Stacking Wisely: Managing Scope and Priorities
Every project begins with a list of ideas, but the reality of time, cost and risk forces a tough question: what belongs in the first release? Delivering everything at once may sound appealing, but it often leads to instability, wasted effort and missed opportunities for learning from real users.
Start with the problem
Before anything else, ensure decision-makers agree on what problem is being solved. A simple framework of three questions is effective:
- Who is experiencing the problem?
- What is the problem?
- Why does it matter?
In a castle-building analogy, merchants face a market constrained by poor foundations – limiting growth and trade. In software terms, a system too unstable for additional features prevents teams from adapting to market demand. A clearly articulated problem provides a lens through which features can be assessed.
Avoid the trap of over-simplification with clear principles
A narrow focus on the immediate problem can produce a quick win but risks long-term frustration, and features that do not consider scalability, flexibility or future needs will soon require rebuilding. For example, a market expansion may succeed, but if entry gates remain too small or foundational choices too rigid, growth will be limited.
Defining a short set of principles alongside your problem statement helps safeguard against short-sighted decisions, by providing context to what’s important when evaluating features. These principles should influence how requirements are prioritised and where trade-offs are acceptable. They may include long-term architectural goals, user experience priorities or operational resilience. For instance, if future phases will introduce significant load or new user groups, early design choices – like implementing role-based access or building with modularity in mind – can ensure the system is prepared to accommodate tomorrow’s needs, even during MVP scoping. You can read our eight over-arching Engineering Principles here.
Simplify prioritisation
Initial prioritisation benefits from a binary ‘in or our’ filter to quickly define what makes the MVP. Once that shortlist is clear, apply a MoSCoW analysis (Must, Should, Could, Won’t) to balance value and effort. This two-step approach reduces ambiguity, prevents scope creep and clarifies which items belong to future phases.
2. The Picture on the Box: Visualising Requirements
Software is intangible, and unlike a Lego set, there is no picture on the box to show you what it should look like. Without clear visualisation, requirements can be misinterpreted, dependencies overlooked and effort wasted. The ‘picture on the box’ challenge is to make these intangible elements visible, so we can determine which bricks are needed and where they should be stacked. Techniques such as user story mapping and wireframes can help to achieve this.
User Story Mapping
User story mapping is a practical and collaborative way to present a backlog as a visual, flowing representation of a product. Their purpose is to present the epics, features and user stories in the backlog as a chart – almost like a process diagram – showing both the big picture and the details of what is being built.
Think of it as a layered map:
- The top row outlines high-level epics that represent the largest goals
- Under each epic, features group related functionality into logical processes
- Finally, user stories are the individual steps required to complete a task
This tree-like structure should be laid out to trace a start to finish path through the application from the user’s perspective. This exercise makes it easier to separate essential functionality from outdated processes that can be discarded.
The process is inherently collaborative. Working through the journey step-by-step exposes gaps, validates assumptions and challenges unnecessary complexity. Story maps can also support later tasks, such as prioritisation, dependency mapping and planning iterative releases.
Wireframes
When interface and user experience are central to a feature, simple wireframes add clarity. Even rough sketches highlight layout, workflows and user paths, making discussions concrete. The introduction of Generative AI tools and basic creative software such as Figma mean wireframes have become more time-effective and accessible – rather than resorting to underwhelming paint drawings, or expensive UX design.
These lightweight diagrams can help stakeholders quickly critique, refine and align on functionality before development begins. For example, a wireframe of a market interface might expose usability issues, such as layouts unsuited to mobile devices, or prompt the addition of features like search and filters. Teams can incorporate these visual guides into user stories, enhancing shared understanding among developers, testers and stakeholders.
3. All Hands on Bricks: Engaging Stakeholders
Building a system requires the efforts of many hands. Different groups bring different experiences, priorities and assumptions. Without careful management, these differences can derail a project.
Recognising Stakeholder Motivations
Not all stakeholders see change in the same light:
- Some value the legacy system and fear losing familiar tools.
- Others are eager for innovation and push for ambitious features.
- Some may be sceptical, based on past experiences.
- Others may simply lack understanding of what is possible.
Recognising these underlying motivations helps tailor communication and build trust.
Fostering Collaboration
Early workshops set the tone. Use structured icebreakers and open-ended questions to encourage contributions. For example, ask participants to share what excites them about the project and what they see as possible risks. Ensure quieter voices are heard by directly inviting input, so no critical knowledge is overlooked.
Stakeholder engagement is more than extracting requirements – it is about building ownership. People who contribute to the design process are more likely to support and champion the final product.
Clear and Consistent Communication
Projects benefit from a central knowledge base that includes:
- Problem statements and project principles
- Glossaries of terms and roles
- Guidance on processes like testing and agile practices
- Tools and dashboards for visibility on progress
Provide introductory sessions, especially when stakeholders are unfamiliar with agile delivery. Record these sessions and keep materials accessible for new team members joining mid-project.
Conclusion
Defining the right system requirements is a structured, collaborative process. This process involves stacking wisely, creating the ‘visual on the box’ through techniques such as wireframes and story maps and engaging stakeholders through thoughtful communication, consistent knowledge sharing and structured workshops.
When approached this way, requirements gathering can transform from standard documentation to a system foundation, built brick by brick, that is resilient, user-focused and scalable.
