Skip to main content

One sentence does not make a User Story

I'm working with a large client that has adopted the classic user story format for the backlog.

"As a user, I want some feature  so that I receive this benefit."


Yet, I'm sure that it is not delivering the desired shared understanding that throwing out the classic business requirements document and adopting the scrum/XP user story practice is designed to deliver.

So if your groups user stories have become just a piece of boiler plate language to satisfy some agile coach's requirement - maybe you should reflect upon the desired reason for user stories rather than requirements documentation so many years ago.  User stories do work.  But you have to tell a story.  Few authors are good enough to tell a story in one sentence.

Here Ron is pointing to one of the XP practices that were very successful in replacing the big upfront requirements documents with the concept of stories.  In XP this was the Card-Conversation-Confirmation technique.  In this technique the card and the label or title written upon the card is the place-holder used in planning.  In this way the card becomes a token for the planning game (XP practice similar to Scrum's Sprint planning).  The Conversation is the part of the practice that may be missing if your groups don't find the one sentence description (in classis form) to be sufficient to plan, estimate, design, develop, test, and deploy the user story.


Another group behavior that I've noticed is that the Confirmation aspect of these user stories may be a bullet point list of statements that are not recordings of a dialogue (as described in Ron's XP article).  To improve efficiency of requirements gathering some groups have people working independently and ahead of the development teams to write user stories and acceptance criteria.  This practice can sometimes improve communication and sometime harm the shared understanding that is required for highly productive development teams.  In the C-C-C technique of XP the team and the customer wrote the confirmation statements together, a technique for validating that a shared understand had been reached during the conversation.   This also served as reminders during their demo of the application behaviors that would be observable with working software.

Learn to Tell the Story

The common reframe today is the distinction between telling stories and writing stories. Which is your team doings?  We all are much better at telling stories than at writing stories - it's just how much individuals practice telling stories.  We start at the early age of 3 or 4 and continue to practice for our entire life.  Few of us actually practice writing stories.  Can you see the powerful distinction between these two practices?

When telling stories a great practice is to have one or more people capturing the important points and themes as the teller spins the tale of the feature and the value it will bring to your customers.

User Story Mapping
A higher level abstraction from telling stories occurs in the Story Mapping practice as described by Jeff Patton - Story Mapping is a better way to work with Agile User Stories.

"User Story Mapping is a dead simple idea. Talk about user’s journey through your product building a simple model that tells your user’s story as you do. But it turns out this simple idea makes working with user stories in agile development a lot easier."

The behavior of teams that are being helped by the practice of writing detailed user stories is quite different than the behavior of teams that are being harmed by the practice.  The great thing about Scrum is that this difference should become apparent in a short amount of time - say one or two sprints.  When the shared understanding is being communicated by the written story and the conversation and the team is delivering working tested software that meet the confirmation aspects (acceptance criteria) of the story then one can easily observe the behavior in the demonstration of the working application each sprint.  If that is not happening, then perhaps the story is not being communicated, there is more to a great story than just one little sentence.


You also may want to reconsider the format of the classic user story - because they lack the obvious title that all great stories must have.  Try this alternative format:
<What I Want>
so <Role> can <Business Value>
This format creates a nice handle or title in the "What I Want" phrase.

See Also:
Definition of Done vs. User Stories vs. Acceptance Criteria by Mark Levison of Agile Pain Relief a consultant with lot's of wise content and great practices to teach.
Names should not be needed for user stories - by Mike Cohn
Advantages of the As a User I want - user story template - by Mike Cohn
User Stories Applied - book at Amazon
10 Tips for Writing Good User Stories - Roman Pichler
Good Stories have Great Titles - Lance Kind
6 Brilliant ways to slice user stories by Dominic Krimmer

** Telling User Stories vs Writing User Stories **
A Story About User Stories - The real intention behind user stories - by Ebin Poovathany
Focus on telling user stories -  Charles Bradley
Story Mapping concepts (PDF) by Jeff Patton


Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?



Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: http://tinyurl.com/3br9o6n. Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.









In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.





Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    Stories
    To Do
    Work In P…

Webinar: Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done, Ready, and NO.

I was invited to participate in a Scrum Alliance Webinar.  Maybe you would like to listen to us in a discussion of techniques to collaborate at scale (remotely and with many people).  The topic is one that I've got some experience in discussions - yet I never seem to get to done...
Collaboration at Scale: Defining Done and Ready and NO for Distributed Teams
With Joel Bancroft-Connors, Agile Organizational Coach; David A. Koontz, Agile Transition Guide; and Luke Hohmann, CEO and Founder of Conteneo, Inc.


14 February 2018 11 a.m. ET (USA).




The Scrum Guide is pretty clear on the criticality of the definition of Done: "When a Product Backlog item or an Increment is described as "Done," everyone must understand what "Done" means. However, the Scrum Guide ALSO says that the definition of Done can "vary significantly per Scrum Team." This leads us to examine when and how the definition of Done should vary, how distributed teams should cr…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.


I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

A FAILURE to Communicate

I was working with a failing team some time ago.  I use "failing" to describe the outcome of the team - not the people on the team.  Are you OK with that description?



An issue arrose in the stand up - a team member that was to verify the quality of a procedure did so and reported that there were a few records that didn't match expectation in the data set.  Upon inquire the number of records not matching was over 2000.  Most people acknowledged immediately the exaggeration - I could tell by the laughter.  After about 10 minutes of discussing the details of the problem - it appeared the team had a handle on the specific situation.

I stopped the discussion and inquired if they could name the impediment.  One team member did a great job of describing the impediment as a _communication gap_.  Wonderful - I could work with that - the problem had a name and it didn't include anyones Proper Name.

"If the problem has a first name; we are going to have a problem."

I&#…