What if we are doing it wrong?  What if the way we approach building products in software is just wrong?

This is not a posting about estimates or SCRUMbut or anything like that.  This post is is a postulate on what limits we might be implying.  Consider the following:

Developers become 'Software Engineers' and testers are 'Quality Engineers'.  Software engineers care about the code, quality engineers care about the test.  David Hussman (@davidhussman) has mentioned product engineers.  What if we had product engineers?

We try to plan releases and have schedules.  As Alan Cooper (@MrAlanCooper) on July 1 said 'On budget, on schedule confers no advantage whatsoever to the user.  Its only benefit is to a manager's illusion of control'.  What do we value of a having a 'release' and is there an alternative way to achieve that?  I've witnessed far too often the subtle confines of a release overshadow the focus of delivering the right thing.  Or, even more common, releasing to release without knowing what we were trying to learn.

We create stories that explicitly state how a system should work and when it is done.  But we rarely know. At best we have ideas.  What if our stories were not statements but questions?  Would that cause a rethink of delivery?

Lately there has been a stress on corporate innovation and creativity.  What if, instead, we focused on solving simpler problems better?

What if instead of restructuring organizations around 'synergies' and looking to remove duplicate jobs, we instead restructuring to remove blocks between communication channels - between maker and consumer?

What if?