I can't see your problem here. You shouldn't use terms like cardinality to business people, you'll just get a blank stare or someone who thinks you're a pretentious &%^$#$@. :-)
The two questions:
How many leads can a reference have?
How many references can a lead have?
are simple English, understandable by anyone who speaks the language.
But, as always, requirements gathering is a teasing-out process. If you can't get clear answers to those simple questions, you need to:
make it clear to the person you're asking that it's necessary to know (and that not knowing will delay the delivery).
sit them down in front of a whiteboard and walk through the possibilities (there's only four, assuming they have a relationship at all: one-one, one-many, many-one, many-many).
Sitting down with them is a good idea for both of you. It makes them understand why you need to know and it gives you the information you need and more domain knowledge.
The only way you can do it is to work through the use cases and determine the cardinality as they explain what's supposed to happen.
You: Who needs a "Lead"? What's it used for?
Them: A lead is what we get from a reference.
You: How should that work?
Them: Well, as part of something or other, we'll get a reference. We want to put those into some kind of list so we can segment and prioritize them and then do cold calling on the reference. A cold call that has interest becomes a "lead".
You: So one reference becomes one lead?
Them: No. Sometimes a reference doesn't generate a lead [Optionality]
You: So one reference might become a lead, or might go no where?
Them: Absolutely.
You: What else happens with a reference? Anything other than creating a possible lead?
Them: Nothing.
You: Nothing?
Them: Except when send out for credit scoring and re-rank all the references.
You: So there are two use cases? Initial reference and credit scoring?
Them: I guess so.
You: And the credit scoring of a reference can create a lead?
Them: Yes. Does all the time.
You: So a reference can generate zero, one or many leads? [Cardinality]
Them: Nope. Zero or one.
You: Unless it gets scored, then it might generate a second lead.
Them: Right. Zero, one or two. Never more than three of four. Call it six at the absolute upper limit. Give us six leads per reference. We'll never need any more than that.
You: How about an infinite number through the magic of foreign key references?
Them: Never. It's only zero or one. Except when it's two. [Attempted Repudiation]
I think the only way you can meaningfully engage users is to discuss the use cases. Not the data model.
发布评论
评论（3）
我在这里看不到你的问题。你不应该对商务人士使用基数之类的术语，否则你只会得到白眼，或者别人认为你是个自命不凡的人&%^$#$@。 :-)
两个问题：
是简单的英语，任何说该语言的人都可以理解。
但是，一如既往，需求收集是一个梳理过程。如果您无法获得这些简单问题的明确答案，您需要：
和他们坐在一起对你们俩来说都是个好主意。它使他们理解您为什么需要知道，并为您提供所需的信息和更多领域知识。
I can't see your problem here. You shouldn't use terms like cardinality to business people, you'll just get a blank stare or someone who thinks you're a pretentious &%^$#$@. :-)
The two questions:
are simple English, understandable by anyone who speaks the language.
But, as always, requirements gathering is a teasing-out process. If you can't get clear answers to those simple questions, you need to:
Sitting down with them is a good idea for both of you. It makes them understand why you need to know and it gives you the information you need and more domain knowledge.
您可以做到这一点的唯一方法是研究用例并在它们解释应该发生的情况时确定基数。
你：谁需要“领导”？它是用来做什么的？
他们：线索是我们从参考资料中得到的。
你：那该怎么办？
他们：嗯，作为某些事情的一部分，我们会得到一个参考。我们希望将它们放入某种列表中，以便我们可以对它们进行分段和优先级排序，然后对引用进行冷调用。一个有兴趣的陌生电话就变成了“线索”。
你：所以一份参考资料就变成了一份线索？
他们：不会。有时，参考文献不会产生潜在客户[可选性]
您：那么，一个参考文献可能会成为潜在客户，或者可能无处可去？
他们：当然。
你：参考文献还会发生什么？除了创造可能的线索之外还有什么吗？
他们：没什么。
你：没什么？
他们：除非发送信用评分并对所有参考文献重新排名。
你：那么有两个用例？初始参考和信用评分？
他们：我想是这样。
你：推荐人的信用评分可以创造领先优势吗？
他们：是的。一直都这样。
你：所以一个推荐人可以产生零个、一个或者多个潜在客户？ [基数]
他们：不。零或一。
你：除非得分，否则可能会产生第二次领先。
他们：对。零个、一两个。永远不要超过四分之三。称其为绝对上限六。每个参考给我们六个线索。我们永远不需要更多。
你：通过外键引用的魔力获得无限数量怎么样？
他们：从来没有。只有零或一。除非是两个人的时候。 [尝试否认]
我认为能够有意义地吸引用户的唯一方法是讨论用例。不是数据模型。
您可以从用例中导出数据模型。
The only way you can do it is to work through the use cases and determine the cardinality as they explain what's supposed to happen.
You: Who needs a "Lead"? What's it used for?
Them: A lead is what we get from a reference.
You: How should that work?
Them: Well, as part of something or other, we'll get a reference. We want to put those into some kind of list so we can segment and prioritize them and then do cold calling on the reference. A cold call that has interest becomes a "lead".
You: So one reference becomes one lead?
Them: No. Sometimes a reference doesn't generate a lead [Optionality]
You: So one reference might become a lead, or might go no where?
Them: Absolutely.
You: What else happens with a reference? Anything other than creating a possible lead?
Them: Nothing.
You: Nothing?
Them: Except when send out for credit scoring and re-rank all the references.
You: So there are two use cases? Initial reference and credit scoring?
Them: I guess so.
You: And the credit scoring of a reference can create a lead?
Them: Yes. Does all the time.
You: So a reference can generate zero, one or many leads? [Cardinality]
Them: Nope. Zero or one.
You: Unless it gets scored, then it might generate a second lead.
Them: Right. Zero, one or two. Never more than three of four. Call it six at the absolute upper limit. Give us six leads per reference. We'll never need any more than that.
You: How about an infinite number through the magic of foreign key references?
Them: Never. It's only zero or one. Except when it's two. [Attempted Repudiation]
I think the only way you can meaningfully engage users is to discuss the use cases. Not the data model.
You derive the data model from the use cases.
并且不要忘记询问其他用户。其他部门可能有不同的看法。
And don't forget to ask the other users. Other departments might have different views.