• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Open with the reason this software should exist, not a list of screens. Which people will use the system, how often, and what happens today? An estimator who knows what you are trying to achieve will suggest a cheaper route to it; one who only sees the requirements as given can only price the list as written.

Define what is included as user stories or scenarios: a walk through each important path. Just as important, write down what is out of scope. An explicit list of exclusions prevents more argument later than the rest of the brief combined. Indicate as well which parts are firm and which are still open — the difference changes the price, cost comparison nearshore vs offshore development and hiding it only hurts you.

Set out your constraints. These include systems you must integrate with, the data you already hold and its condition, security and compliance rules, user volumes, target platforms and any technology you are committed to. Where a date is genuinely fixed, say why hire a dedicated team instead of freelancers: an experienced team is usually able to rearrange the plan to protect it, but not if the date is a secret.

Define what done means for the important items. Testable acceptance criteria do not need special syntax: a short list setting out the expected behaviour will do. This single habit compresses the review at the end by a surprising margin and closes off the usual argument at handover.

Finally, say what you expect back. Ask for an itemised estimate, the assumptions used, whatever the team considers risky and an optimistic and a pessimistic figure. Read a wide range as a signal about the brief: it tells you the part of the brief that needs work. Then rewrite that part and request a revised number — the revised figure tends to be the one worth planning around.