The One Where It Just Sorta Works

What swims like a fish, burrows like a mole, lays eggs like a bird, and somehow still produces milk? No, it’s not a Frankenstein experiment—it’s a platypus! Much like an Agile project with unclear requirements, the platypus is a mashup of features that 'sort of work' together, but leave you scratching your head. Let’s dive into why your Agile team should aim for better integration than nature’s oddball creation.

Don't just take it from me, watch Seth Meyers break it down for us on minute 3:00 of the video.

"Platypus what's your game here" - Seth Meyer

It’s a common scenario in Agile projects: the absence of clear, cohesive direction from the product owner or product team. Ideally, product ownership is responsible for defining the “what” and the “why,” ensuring that the team is aligned around a clear vision and prioritized goals. However, when this guidance is absent or ambiguous—when the “requirements” are as murky as a platypus's evolutionary history—the responsibility inevitably falls on the development team to figure it out.

Without clear direction a "platypus-like" solution, a mishmash of features and functionalities cobbled together with the best of intentions but lacking a coherent strategy, may be the final deliverable. It might burrow, swim, and climb, but no one is quite sure why or how these abilities should work together—or if they’re even solving the right problem. In the end, what “sort of works” is handed over, and the team is left wondering if that’s really what anyone wanted in the first place.

This scenario highlights the critical gap that emerges when product ownership fails to fully engage with the team, leaving developers to play the dual role of builders and decision-makers—often without the necessary context or authority to do so effectively.

Agile thrives on clear communication and iterative refinement, but this can falter with vague goals.

Burrowing to Find the Root Cause 

In an ideal Agile environment, requirements provide just enough clarity to guide development while leaving room for creativity and innovation. But what happens when those requirements are a tangle of contradictions and half-baked ideas?

The Struggle to Reconcile Vision and Execution

Unclear Vision
Leadership might have a high-level vision (“We need an animal that’s versatile!”), but without translating that vision into actionable requirements, the team is left to fill in the blanks. The lack of specifics creates a scenario where every stakeholder has a different mental model of what success looks like. Is it an otter? A beaver? A duck? The result is a piecemeal effort where the team tries to accommodate all possibilities, ultimately delivering something that satisfies no one.

The Translation Problem
Teams are forced to guess when function and constraints aren’t clearly defined. For instance, if “swimming” is critical but not explicitly stated, the team might prioritize burrowing or climbing instead, unintentionally misaligning with business goals. This “translation” from vague requirements to technical execution often leads to wasted effort, rework, and frustration as the team discovers—too late—that their interpretation didn’t match leadership’s expectations.

Clear Requirements with Prioritization

In Agile, clear requirements are the foundation for delivering value. Without them, teams are left guessing what stakeholders truly need, often resulting in features that are misaligned with business goals. Instead of jumping straight into “what” the product should do, it’s crucial to start with the “why” behind each requirement. Why should the product burrow or swim? What problem are we solving, and how does each feature contribute to that goal?

Defining the "Why"

Understanding the intent behind a feature helps teams focus on delivering value rather than just ticking off checkboxes. For instance:

• If burrowing is important because the product must operate in underground environments, that context guides the design decisions.

• If swimming is critical for crossing barriers, it clarifies priorities for development.

By grounding the team in the "why," product owners ensure everyone is aligned on the purpose and impact of each feature, reducing the risk of unnecessary complexity or misdirected efforts and arming the team with context to make decisions if needed, thus making the project less platypus-y.

Tickets with Acceptance Criteria

To make requirements actionable, Agile teams use descriptions with clearly defined acceptance criteria. A good ticket goes beyond vague directives like “It should swim” and instead specifies:

• A well-crafted description of the work. User stories work, but a good explanation will do. 

• Acceptance Criteria: For example, the product must swim for at least 5 minutes in freshwater without fatigue.

This structure not only clarifies expectations but also gives the team measurable goals to verify success, preventing ambiguous outcomes like “it sort of works.”

Continuous Feedback Loops

One of Agile’s greatest strengths is its reliance on iterative cycles and continuous feedback. These feedback loops allow teams to validate their understanding of requirements and adjust course as needed.

Frequent Reviews with Stakeholders

Holding regular check-ins with stakeholders is key to avoiding misalignment. This is especially critical for ambiguous projects, where the team’s interpretation of “burrow” or “swim” might differ from the product owner’s vision.

Promote Demos as a Checkpoint

Demos are a powerful tool to catch “platypus-like” outcomes before they spiral out of control. By presenting a working increment of the product, teams can gather immediate feedback and course-correct. Questions like “Is this really what you want?” or “Does this feature meet your needs?” provide opportunities to uncover discrepancies early. For example:

• If stakeholders see that the product swims well but struggles to burrow, they can refocus priorities before further development.

• If the hybrid functionality feels clunky, adjustments can be made early, saving time and effort.

These iterative checkpoints create a shared sense of ownership and ensure the team is building the right thing at the right time.

Alignment on Feasibility

Balancing ambition with reality is an art that Agile teams and leadership must master. While it’s exciting to dream big—creating a product that burrows, swims, and climbs—it’s equally important to assess what’s feasible within constraints like time, budget, and resources.

Collaborative Planning

Teams and leadership should collaborate to evaluate the trade-offs involved in achieving each requirement. For example:

• Is burrowing really essential, or can it be deferred to a later iteration?

• Can we focus on swimming now and revisit climbing in a future sprint?

By openly discussing feasibility, teams can make informed decisions that prioritize high-value features while staying realistic about what can be delivered.

The Role of Trade-Offs in Agile

Agile thrives on flexibility, allowing teams to adapt as new information emerges. However, this requires transparent communication about what’s achievable. Leadership must be willing to adjust expectations, and teams must feel empowered to push back on unrealistic demands. For instance:

• “If you want it to burrow and swim, we’ll need to sacrifice climbing for this sprint.”

• “Adding flight capability will increase complexity and delay delivery. Is it worth it?”

This collaborative decision-making ensures that the final product is both functional and aligned with business goals—avoiding the pitfalls of a feature-stuffed platypus.

Building a better animal

The platypus, with all its quirky charm, might be a fascinating example of nature’s creativity, but it’s hardly a model for Agile success. Instead of settling for a mishmash of disconnected features, Agile teams should strive to build something cohesive, purposeful, and aligned with a clear vision. Think of it as creating a streamlined otter—sleek, functional, and perfectly suited for its environment—rather than a confusing hybrid that leaves stakeholders scratching their heads.

The Agile Approach: Refine and Collaborate

Agile principles provide the perfect blueprint for avoiding “platypus projects.” By embracing iterative design, teams can deliver small, functional increments, allowing for continuous refinement based on stakeholder feedback. Each iteration moves the product closer to its ideal form, ensuring alignment with user needs and business goals.

Collaboration is another critical ingredient. Regular communication between product owners, stakeholders, and the development team ensures that everyone shares the same understanding of what’s being built and why. This collaborative approach not only minimizes ambiguity but also fosters innovation, as diverse perspectives contribute to refining the final product.

Purpose Over Patchwork

Ultimately, the goal is to build something with intent—something that solves real problems without unnecessary complexity. By focusing on clarity, continuous feedback, and realistic feasibility, teams can avoid the pitfalls of creating “just another platypus.” Instead, they’ll deliver solutions that are not only functional but also elegant, efficient, and tailored to the needs of their users.

So the next time your Agile team faces this challenge, remember: it’s about building a better animal—one that thrives in its purpose and delivers real value to those who need it most.