The "Living Prototype": Killing the Specification Document

The Shadow Competitor: Why Excel Persists

It is entirely reasonable for Operations and Finance departments to resist new software initiatives. When an Infrastructure Manager or CIO introduces a customized ERP module, they are often competing against a tool that offers zero friction: Excel.

We must validate why Excel remains the dominant operating system for business logic. It offers immediate availability and total flexibility. There is no backlog, no ticket system, and no waiting period to add a column. For a department head, Excel represents autonomy.

The Governance Gap However, this autonomy creates a significant strategic risk: "Shadow IT." When critical business processes live in .xlsx files on local drives, we lose version control, security, and data integrity. We create data silos that are invisible to the organization.

The solution is not to force users into rigid, bureaucratic systems—that simply drives them back to their spreadsheets. The solution is to provide "Excel with Guardrails." We must build tools that offer the flexibility users demand, backed by the structured database and security governance the organization requires.

Theoretical vs. Actual Requirements

There is a fundamental efficiency gap in traditional software delivery models (often referred to as Waterfall). These models rely on gathering Theoretical Requirements: asking stakeholders what they think they need.

This often leads to the "20-field form" scenario. A stakeholder, aiming to be thorough, requests a comprehensive data entry form. The specification is approved, and the budget is allocated. Yet, upon delivery, the form is abandoned because it hinders operational speed.

We must pivot to the Steve Jobs principle: Users often cannot articulate what they need until they interact with it.

The Strategic Pivot: Instead of documenting what users say, we must observe what users do. We move from capturing theoretical requirements to capturing Actual Requirements. This requires a shift in medium: from paper to code.

The Living Prototype

Paper specifications are patient; they allow logical fallacies to survive until the implementation phase. To close the efficiency gap, I advocate for replacing the massive Specification Document (Lastenheft) with the "Living Prototype."

A Living Prototype is not a click-dummy or a Figma wireframe. It is functional, production-grade software—often built on high-velocity stacks like Next.js and Supabase—deployed from Day 1.

The Workflow Shift:

• Traditional: "Let’s schedule a series of workshops to define how the input mask should look."
• Living Prototype: "Here is a secure link to the functional input mask. Please use it for today’s batch and report back on what slowed you down."

This approach acts as "Excel with Guardrails." We give the user immediate utility (like Excel), but we capture the data in a structured, governed environment from the very first entry. If a user identifies a missing feature, we deploy the fix within hours, not months.

Risk Management: The Cost of Assumptions

Stability-Focused Architects often argue that extensive planning reduces risk. Ideally, defining every parameter upfront prevents wasted budget.

However, in practice, long planning cycles often increase risk by effectively "shorting" the project on unverified assumptions. If you spend six months planning based on a misunderstanding of the user's workflow, you have compounded that error into a massive sunk cost.

Iterative Risk Control The Living Prototype is a financial risk management tool.

• If we deploy a prototype in week one and the users reject the workflow, we have lost one week of development time.
• We correct the course immediately based on empirical usage data.

We trade the illusion of security (perfect documentation) for actual security (validated adoption).

The Verdict

The era of multi-year "Big Bang" launches is increasingly incompatible with modern operational tempos. While detailed governance is non-negotiable, the method of achieving it must change.

If you are an executive or project lead, consider the trade-off: You can have a perfect specification document that describes a system no one uses, or you can have a Living Prototype that evolves alongside your actual business processes.

To defeat the chaos of Excel, do not build a cage. Build a better spreadsheet. Stop planning based on theory, and start validating through utility.