Principles of Shaping — Rough, Solved, Bounded

Chapter 2 of Shape Up defines the three properties of well-shaped work. Shaping sits between the extremes of over-specification (wireframes that hide complexity) and under-specification (“build a calendar view” with no context).

The shaping spectrum

• Too specific: the more specific the work, the harder it is to estimate. Detailed mockups hide implementation complexities. Everyone commits to the wrong details too early.
• Too vague: “we’ll know it when we see it.” Team members can’t make trade-offs. No information to decide what to include or leave out.

Three properties of shaped work

1. Rough — visibly unfinished. Open spaces where contributors apply their own judgment and expertise. Prevents committing to wrong details early.
2. Solved — despite being rough, the main elements of the solution are there at the macro level and connect together. Not specified to individual tasks, but the overall solution is spelled out.
3. Bounded — indicates what not to do. Specific appetite (time budget) requires limiting scope and leaving specific things out.

Shaping is design work

The shaped concept is an interaction design viewed from the user’s perspective. It defines what the feature does, how it works, and where it fits into existing flows.

Connects to Shape Up, project management, product development.

Open questions

• How do you apply shaping to data/analytics projects where the “output” is insight rather than features?
• What’s the data team equivalent of “appetite” — time-boxed analysis sprints?