Sanity Checks – A “Done” Criterion

For every work artifact we create there is often a short list of attributes or questions that can help us determine if the artifact is done. This short list reminds us of classic patterns that have risen to become accepted truth and classic mistakes that continue to dog us. This list of questions or attributes is what I call a Sanity Check, a quick look to see if the work artifact done.

For example, if I am remolding a kitchen, the question, “Does the stove, sink, and refrigerator from a triangle pattern?” should be a Sanity Check. I may choose NOT to have my refrigerator, sink, and stove in a triangle but I better have a good reason why not.

When I was a Quality Assurance Representative for the Department of Defense one of my tasks was to watch the manual testing of circuit boards. Those who have placed the probes and watched the oscilloscope know what a tedious job this can be. A Sanity Check called the “smoke test” often proceeded this long series of manual tests. If you applied power to the entire circuit board and it caught on fire or smoked, then don’t bother with the rest of the tests.

A key point here is that a Sanity Check can be quickly applied and the results determined on the spot. Scanning a list of questions or desired attributes should take only a matter of minutes, not hours. The items on the Sanity Check list should represent clear conditions that the violation of those conditions should put the item under review into question as to if it is really done.

However, failing a Sanity Check may not always be as clear as catching on fire. For example, one Sanity Check item for a software requirement is that has no ambiguity. While this is a worthwhile goal, I don’t believe that “no” ambiguity is a good thing. We already have a profession of people who try to write things with “no” ambiguity. They are contract lawyers and nobody really understands what the heck they have written. Here, the Sanity Check is more concerned that the people reading the requirement will have the same understanding as the people writing it. This is more of a judgment call than a hard and fast rule.

Sanity Checks are useful both as a done criterion and as a creation guide. Sanity Checks in the form of checklists can be used for peer reviews. Each reviewer uses the checklist as an aid to help find potential mistakes in the work artifact. By reviewing the checklist of twenty or so Sanity Checks prior to the start of a review and having it lying in sight while reviewing, a reviewer can greatly increase not just the number of potential mistakes found but also the number of categories of mistakes.

The author can also use the checklist as they create the work artifact. By consulting the checklist, the author can use that knowledge to help self-review and prepare the deliverable for other eyes. It can help the author side-step those classic mistakes that have haunted others.

While the core for many Sanity Checks for a given work artifact will be the same across companies and industries, there should be customization for each application. There are mistakes that your organization makes that others have never seen.

As with many things, Sanity Checks work best with experienced staff. Sanity Checks are mere statements that are designed to be interpreted by people. Their brevity requires a somewhat knowledgeable mind to fill in all the gaps and to make the final decision of the Sanity Check’s applicability.

Like the Sanity Check that blog entries should be less than 1,000 words.