There’s nothing worse than having to execute someone else’s minute breakdown of work. People should be responsible for executing their own ideas. Then you get feedback on what was and wasn’t correct, and have only yourself to blame.

Having that ownership stimulates a much greater level of craftsmanship and skill growth. Documentation is great, but the idea that a spike author and implementor should be different people is awful.

The spike doesn’t define HOW the later work is done, only the information it was supposed to research.

How to do something would be sorted out during grooming or perhaps when adding the story to the sprint.

> Part of the spike should be documenting the results so that anyone else can use them

Do you have other people on the team review this? Or do you just trust that it's complete?

Sorry for all the questions, I just feel like these are things that are never answered adequately.

I would think it would be presented/discussed with the team.

I’m not sure what I’m used to at my job is correct, so I’m trying to stick to my understanding of how I think it’s supposed to work.