Sprint Learnings

Project-specific observations from past sprints that inform future setup.

Learnings — Zebra Design Sprints

Review this file before starting any new sprint project. Each section captures what went well, what broke, and what to watch for — drawn from real project evidence, not theory.

Research Tech — January 2026

The Product Works — Client reaction confirmed the sprint model delivers €40-65k market value at €15k, with immediate ship plans and permission to quote; frontend design engineering works as a productised sprint process.

User Testing Is the Differentiator — 9 interviews across 2 rounds crystallised the ICP, validated 7 strategic decisions with real data, and surfaced the "chat reduces trust" finding that saved months of wrong-direction engineering; this is what sustains premium positioning as AI commoditises implementation.

Energy Collapse Is the Priority Problem — 3 consecutive sprints without recovery led to 2am finishes, dropped exercise, and violated every boundary; root causes are hours (not timeline), so the fix is the Full Stack: 4-hour daily cap, personal trainer each morning, front-load complexity, Thursday noon technical freeze, and cap consecutive build sprints at 2.

  • The collapse was consecutive, not structural. Sprint 1 alone would have been fine. The breakdown came at Sprint 3 of 3. A single sprint in isolation may feel sustainable — don't let that fool you into stacking them.
  • Exercise isn't optional — it's neurological medicine. When it dropped in the final week, everything else collapsed with it. The PT isn't a luxury, it's the cheapest executive function outsourcing available.

Travel and Projects Cannot Overlap

Too much pressure. Research Tech had travel days conflicting with build schedules. This can't happen again. Sprint weeks are protected from travel.

Timeline Adjustments Are Real

Life with a newborn and AuDHD meant moving days and extending over a week. This happened and will happen again. The async gap in the sprint model absorbs some of this, but the build days need to account for life.

Only the Founder Had Project Context

Daniel (team member) turned up to workshops without full context of scope boundaries and the value being delivered. This led to small scope creeps — extra user research sessions, additional questions, additions that were hard to push back on because expectations hadn't been set upfront.

Solution: Onboard all team members through the project/onboarding flow before Workshop 1. Anyone attending a workshop needs to understand: what the sprint delivers, what it doesn't, and where the boundaries are. This reduces cognitive load in Workshop 1 and prevents mid-sprint scope conversations.

Facilitator Directness Needs Calibrating

Bartek: "You never say something negative. Sometimes it's hard to tell if the idea is stupid." Technical founders want blunt assessments. Calibrate directness to the client.

Default Tech Stack (If Client Has No Preference)

If the client doesn't have an existing codebase or is unsure of tech stack, recommend: React 19 + TanStack Router + Tailwind CSS v4 + shadcn/ui + Vite. This combination worked well on Research Tech and is reusable across sprint projects.