One of the largest sources of contention between Developers, QA, and Product is what constitutes "done.” We've had countless instances in which "we", as QA, have said the work is not done as all the acceptance criteria have not been met, only to hear from Product or Development, "oh those AC don't really matter, just pass it anyway.” This contention comes from a lack of formalizing the Definition of Done (DoD) for the work, be it a specific feature, sprint, or even tickets themselves.
What is the Definition of Done, and Why Does it Matter?
The Definition of Done (DoD) is a clear, agreed-upon set of criteria that a software product must satisfy to be considered complete. It's the line in the sand that says, "Yes, this work is ready for the next stage." But why is it so crucial across different roles in software development?
Alignment and Transparency: A well-defined DoD ensures everyone's on the same page, eliminating ambiguity and reducing friction that come with misunderstandings.
Quality Assurance: For QA professionals, the DoD guides us on ensuring quality standards as defined by the organization.
Risk Management: By clearly defining "done," we can better assess and mitigate risks associated with incomplete work.
Efficiency and Productivity: A clear DoD streamlines development and testing, saving time and resources.
According to a study by the Standish Group, only 29% of software projects are considered successful (delivered on time, on budget, with required features). Projects with clear definitions and good user involvement have a success rate of 62%, compared to 6% for projects lacking these elements.
DoD: Clarity and Balance, Not Perfection
A common misconception about the DoD is that it's a tool for achieving perfection in software development. This misunderstanding can lead to resistance in adopting DoD practices. We’ll review how a DoD create clarity and balance risk with quality, rather than demanding flawlessness.
The Pitfall of Pursuing Perfection
In an ideal world, every feature would be bug-free, every user story would be complete, and every stakeholder would be 100% satisfied before release. However, in the real world of software development, pursuing such perfection often leads to:
Missed market opportunities due to delayed releases
Increased development costs
Team burnout from constant pressure to achieve the unachievable
Analysis paralysis, where fear of imperfection prevents action
DoD as a Clarity and Risk Management Tool
Rather than a checklist for perfection, think of DoD as a sophisticated tool for creating clarity and managing risk:
Defining Acceptable Quality: DoD helps teams articulate the minimum acceptable quality level. This isn't about being perfect; it's about being good enough to provide value while managing risks.
Balancing Priorities: By explicitly stating what "done" means, teams can make informed decisions about trade-offs. For example, is it worth delaying a release to fix a minor UI issue if all critical functionality is working?
Enhancing Communication: DoD makes quality and completeness visible and quantifiable. This clarity allows all stakeholders to make informed decisions about releases, rather than relying on vague assurances or gut feelings.
Supporting Iterative Improvement: Instead of aiming for perfection in one go, DoD supports an iterative approach. Teams can release a "done" (but not perfect) version, gather feedback, and improve in the next iteration.
The Power of Clarity in Decision Making
By providing this clarity, DoD empowers teams to:
Make data-driven decisions about readiness for release
Communicate effectively with stakeholders about the state of the product
Continuously improve their standards and processes
The goal of DoD isn't to create a perfect product. It's to create a shared understanding of what constitutes a releasable product that delivers value to users while managing acceptable levels of risk.
In essence, DoD shifts the conversation from "Is it perfect?" to "Is it valuable and safe to release?" This approach allows teams to deliver high-quality software consistently without getting caught in the trap of pursuing an unattainable perfection.
DoD: A Cross-Functional Perspective
To help understand the difference a clear DoD can make, it's helpful to imagine two development organizations, one where a team works with a clear DoD, and another where they don't. Let's explore the difference.
Team A: Working Without a DoD
It's the day before the sprint is officially supposed to end, QA is telling the team that we won't make the sprint deadline as all AC are not passing. Developers are frustrated as they see AC failing, but have understood from Product that these aren't critical for the release. The product owner is fielding calls from stakeholders, unable to confidently say what features are truly ready.
In this world:
QA is overwhelmed, testing everything because they're unsure what's essential and advocating for quality and a delayed release.
Developers are frustrated, constantly hearing that their work isn't good enough when they have understood it's what is needed.
The product owner is stressed, unable to give clear timelines or feature lists to stakeholders.
The result? Delayed releases, buggy features, and a team that’s working hard but feeling the pressure from unclear expectations.
Team B: Thriving with a DoD
Now, let's look at an organization that requires well-defined DoDs. It's also the end of the sprint, but the atmosphere is different.
QA Perspective: QA knows exactly what "done" looks like and can clearly communicate to the team: "We've met our DoD criteria. These minor issues can wait for the next sprint."
All critical path tests are green
Performance benchmarks are met
Developer Perspective: Developers are relaxed knowing that DoD criteria have been met, and their work has been verified as release ready.
Code reviews are complete
Unit test coverage exceeds 80%
The feature flag is in place for gradual rollout
Product Owner Perspective: Product feels confident setting clear expectations and showcasing tangible progress.
9 out of 10 planned user stories are complete and meet the DoD
The one incomplete story is clearly marked for the next sprint and is low priority
User documentation is updated and ready
In this scenario, the team is aligned. They know exactly what "done" means, and it's the same for everyone. The release proceeds smoothly, with each team member confident in their role and the overall quality of the product.
The DoD Difference
With a clearly defined DoD and time to review the DoD prior to release, potential conflict is transformed into a structured, collaborative decision-making process. It's not about perfection, but agreed upon standards that balance quality, time, and business needs.
The Business Impact of a Well-Defined DoD
Implementing a clear Definition of Done offers tangible benefits for the entire business:
Improved Product Quality: A study by Capers Jones found that teams using clear definitions and standards detected 95% of defects before release, compared to 80% for teams without such standards.
Enhanced Collaboration and Morale: Clear expectations lead to better teamwork and job satisfaction.
Increased Customer Satisfaction: Consistently meet or exceed end-user expectations.
Greater Predictability: Teams utilizing clear DoDs are better able to predict sprint outcomes.
Reduced Technical Debt: Minimize long-term issues by including criteria like code reviews and documentation.
Conclusion: Embracing "Done" as a Path to Excellence
In the world of software development, the journey from concept to "done" is rarely straightforward. By embracing a well-defined Definition of Done, we're setting a standard of excellence that's achievable, sustainable, and predictable across all roles.
Remember: "Done" doesn't mean perfect—it means meeting agreed-upon criteria that deliver value while managing risks. By aligning on what "done" means across different perspectives, we pave the way for smoother collaborations, happier teams, and ultimately, better software.