Apps development: common mistakes and how to avoid them

An app can start with a seemingly clear idea — managing orders, making reservations, or giving customers access — and eventually accumulating functions, doubts, and deferred decisions.The problem is not usually to want to improve a process, but to start developing apps without specifying what needs to be changed and how it will be checked.

In this guide you will see the mistakes that you need to prevent before starting a project. At the end of the guide you can decide if your idea is ready to become a first version, what questions to solve and what information to lead to a conversation with a development team.

What is being tried to achieve with an app

Before choosing technology, design or functionalities, specify the objective in operational or commercial terms. An app can be used to record visits, centralize customer requests or reduce steps in the management of a service. They are different objectives and require different scopes.

It will help you to separate the project into three layers:

-OBjective: what should be better for the business or for the app user. -Scope: what functions, data, profiles and integrations are needed to achieve this. -Solution: how it will be built and from which devices it will be used.

This separation avoids confusing a solution with a need. For example, ordering a mobile app may be a valid hypothesis, but it is best to check first whether people need to use it from the phone, from a computer or in both contexts.

common mistakes in app development

1. Start with screens instead of the problem

Symptom: the project is described with phrases such as "we want an app like this" or "we need a full panel", but it is not clear what specific task needs to be improved.

Cause: takes a visual reference or a solution known as a starting point. That may help explain an idea, but it does not define the process, rules, or needs of those who will use the application.

Consequence: attractive screens that do not solve the actual bottleneck can be built. It is also difficult to decide which function to enter first and which one can expect.

Correct: describes a current situation and the expected change. Instead of "I need a management app", it formulates something like: "the team must be able to check the status of each request without looking for information on several sites." Then it identifies who does the action, what data it needs and what result it should get.

2. Treat all functionalities as essential

Symptom: The first version includes users, notifications, reports, payments, documents, automations and integrations because everything seems necessary.

Cause: The initial objective of what is desirable or what is expected for later has not been separated.

Consequence: increases the difficulty of defining the scope and validating what is being built. In addition, a secondary function may depend on decisions or services that are not yet prepared.

Correct: classifies each requirement into four groups:

-Inessential: without it, the first version does not meet your goal. -Desirable: provides value, but can be incorporated later. -Future: is preserved as a possibility of evolution. -Out of scope: is not part of the proposed project.

For each function, ask what objective supports, who will use it, what happens if it is postponed and how you will know it works properly.

3. Do not define users, roles and permissions

Symptom: is spoken of as "users" as if everyone were to see and do the same within the app.

Cause: is left for later who can create, consult, modify, approve or delete information.

Result: important decisions appear when development is already advanced. An application for clients, operating staff and administration may require different paths, visible data and permissions for each profile.

Correction: creates a simple list of profiles and actions. You don't need to design every detail from the very beginning, but you do need to answer basic questions: who accesses, what can consult, what can modify and who validates sensitive changes.

A hypothetical example: in a request app, a client could create and consult a request; the internal team, update its status; and a responsible person, review incidents or assignments. That distribution conditions screens, rules and tests.

4. Mention integrations without describing the data flow

Symptom: the briefing includes expressions such as "connecting with billing", "syncing with the CRM" or "integrating payments", but without further detail.

Cause: is assumed to name a tool defines integration.

Consequence: issues remain open that can significantly change the scope: what information is sent or received, when it is updated, who controls accesses, and what should happen if the external service does not respond.

Correction: for each integration, documents:

• which system is involved;
• what data is exchanged;
• at which time the exchange takes place;
• which person controls accounts and accesses;
• what behaviour you expect from error or duplicity.

It is not necessary to decide the entire technical implementation before analysing the project. It is necessary to make the dependencies visible so that they are not treated as a minor detail.

5. Leave the contents and data as an assumption

Symptom: is assumed to have initial texts, images, tabs, documents or data, but no one has confirmed where they will come from or who will check them.

Cause: the content is considered a post-development task, although it is part of the experience and the start-up.

Consequence: an application may be technically completed without sufficient information to use it, or with inconsistent data that makes testing and daily operation difficult.

Correct: inventory the necessary contents and data. Indicate what already exists, what to prepare, what to migrate and who validates it. If the app must import information from another system, it is appropriate to identify fields, formats, duplicates and exceptions before assuming that the migration is included.

6. Use ambiguous terms as an acceptance criterion

Symptom: requirements appear as "intuitive", "fast-loading", "easy" or "complete".

Cause: adjectives are used to express an expectation without making it a verifiable condition.

Consequence: each person can interpret the requirement in a different way. This complicates revisions and leaves important discussions for the end.

Correct: transforms each ambiguous idea into an observable action and result.For example, instead of "the form must work well", it defines what happens when a person correctly completes it, what confirmation he sees, where the information arrives, and what message appears if a mandatory data is missing.

Acceptance criteria do not eliminate all project decisions, but allow for a review of relevant functions with a common reference.

7. Forget who will keep the app after publishing it

Symptom: the conversation focuses on building the application, but not on updating content, managing accesses, resolving issues, or incorporating future changes.

Cause: is the initial delivery as the end of the project, without any further operation.

Result: the business can depend on tasks that no one has assigned or discover late that need documentation, training, management permissions or a maintenance planning.

Correct: defines from the start who will take on each responsibility after launch. Check, at a minimum, who will manage users, update information, retain access to external services and decide on future improvements. If the system handles relevant processes or sensitive data, these decisions require validation from the responsible people within your company.

How to prevent these errors before developing

The best prevention is not to document each screen in detail from day one. It consists of solving first the unknowns that change the scope.

Start by describing a specific flow: what happens now, who intervenes, where time or information is lost and what should happen with the app. Then, define a first version with the minimum functions to check that the flow is solved.

Then it reviews dependencies: external tools, available data, content managers, access profiles and decisions that depend on third parties. If a response remains open, it does not need to be invented; it is enough to identify it as a pending decision before it becomes a reach commitment.

It is also important to separate business decisions from technical decisions. You can define which process should change, who uses the application and what restrictions the company has. The choice of solution should respond to those conditions, not anticipate them.

Checklist for review for your project

Before you start developing apps, check if you can answer these questions clearly:

• What specific problem should be solved by implementation?
• What main action should each type of user be able to complete?
• What will change with respect to the current process?
• What functions are essential in the first version?
• What functions can be postponed without impeding the initial objective?
• What profiles exist and what permissions do each need?
• What data, content or documents should the app include?
• are there integrations? If there are, what information do they exchange, and who controls their accesses?
• How will you verify that each relevant function fulfils what is expected?
• Who will review deliveries and make decisions during the project?
• Who will manage the application and its accesses after the start-up?
• What calendar, tool or compliance restrictions should be validated before defining the solution?

If several answers are still vague, you probably don't need more screens or more features yet: you need to figure out the problem and the pending decisions.

Next step

A well-thought-out app starts with a verifiable target and prioritized scope, not an endless list of features. If you want to contrast if your idea requires an app, what should include its first version, or which dependencies you should review, you can explain your mobile app project to AVSISTEC.