User stories focus on customer value. ... The actual work being done is fleshed out via collaboration revolving around the user story as system development progresses. ... In order to limit scope, user stories have collaboratively developed acceptance criteria which define when the user story meets the stakeholder’s expectations. Test cases are often developed as code (with test driven development) or documented as the code is developed.
[Emphasis mine.]
As a user I want to be able to login to the website.
As a user I want to be able to login to the website with a username.
Since neither provides any customer value, neither are user stories.
You use application software to manage information, make decisions and (ultimately) take an action. If the user story doesn't provide some hint as to what information, decision or action gets taken, there's no customer value, it's just technical folderol -- implementation details that a customer has to endure to get to the interesting part of the application.
Login, specifically, has zero customer value. It's a roadblock that IT erects between customers and the valuable information they need to make decisions and take actions. It's a security mechanism, and most people do not actually like security. Security is imposed on customer by IT. The most popular password (IIRC) is "aaaaaaaa". Why? Customers don't like security.
Detailed, microscopic login user stories may be a symptom of failing to see the real value to the customer.
It just seems to me that we are currently just letting the users create whatever they want as a user story
Good.
I am told we need to keep them all separate for reporting so we can keep a log of everything the user requests.
Not a bad plan, really.
The issue is to separate "crap the user happened to say" from "stuff that makes sense that we can build". It's very, very important to allow the users to say any crap they want to say. It's a good thing to let them ramble.
Periodically (before each sprint) you will prioritize crap the user said into a few things that (1) you might be able to build during the sprint, and (2) create the most significant and dramatic user value you can possibly create. Some stories will get ignored. Some will be low priority. Some will be combined and some will be split. Some things the user said will be contradictory. Some will be outright lies. Some will be incomplete. It's all good. It's just crap the user happened to say. Not divine directives from the mouths of the gods directly to you.
This revised set of user stories drives the sprint. Now you start collaborating with the users to get the details, write test cases, define acceptance, etc., etc.
As you're sprinting toward delivery, the users can continue to say crap that will get appended to the backlog of unimplemented user stories. It's very, very important to allow the users to say any crap they want to say. It's a good thing to let them ramble.
发布评论
评论（1）
[强调我的。]
由于两者都无法提供任何客户价值，因此用户故事也无法提供。
您使用应用程序软件来管理信息、做出决策并（最终）采取行动。如果用户故事没有提供一些关于采取什么信息、决策或行动的提示，那么就没有客户价值，它只是技术文件夹——客户必须忍受才能获得的实施细节应用程序中有趣的部分。
具体来说，登录的客户价值为零。这是 IT 在客户和他们做出决策和采取行动所需的有价值信息之间设置的障碍。这是一种安全机制，而大多数人实际上并不喜欢安全性。安全性由 IT 强加给客户。最流行的密码 (IIRC) 是“aaaaaaaa”。为什么？客户不喜欢安全性。
详细、微观的登录用户故事可能是未能看到客户真正价值的症状。
。
确实，这不是一个糟糕的计划。
问题是将“用户碰巧说的废话”与“我们可以构建的有意义的东西”分开。允许用户说出他们想说的任何废话是非常非常重要的。让他们闲逛是件好事。
定期（在每次冲刺之前），您将把用户所说的废话优先考虑为以下几件事：（1）您可以在冲刺期间构建，以及（2）创造您可能创造的最重要和最引人注目的用户价值。有些故事会被忽视。有些优先级较低。有的会合并，有的会分开。用户说的有些话会是矛盾的。有些是彻头彻尾的谎言。有些会不完整。一切都很好。这只是用户碰巧说的废话。不是从诸神的口中直接向你发出神圣的指令。
这组修改后的用户故事推动了冲刺。现在，您开始与用户合作以获取详细信息，编写测试用例，定义接受程度等。
当您冲刺交付时，用户可以继续说废话，这些废话将被附加到未实现的用户故事的积压中。允许用户说出他们想说的任何废话是非常非常重要的。让他们闲逛是件好事。
[Emphasis mine.]
Since neither provides any customer value, neither are user stories.
You use application software to manage information, make decisions and (ultimately) take an action. If the user story doesn't provide some hint as to what information, decision or action gets taken, there's no customer value, it's just technical folderol -- implementation details that a customer has to endure to get to the interesting part of the application.
Login, specifically, has zero customer value. It's a roadblock that IT erects between customers and the valuable information they need to make decisions and take actions. It's a security mechanism, and most people do not actually like security. Security is imposed on customer by IT. The most popular password (IIRC) is "aaaaaaaa". Why? Customers don't like security.
Detailed, microscopic login user stories may be a symptom of failing to see the real value to the customer.
Good.
Not a bad plan, really.
The issue is to separate "crap the user happened to say" from "stuff that makes sense that we can build". It's very, very important to allow the users to say any crap they want to say. It's a good thing to let them ramble.
Periodically (before each sprint) you will prioritize crap the user said into a few things that (1) you might be able to build during the sprint, and (2) create the most significant and dramatic user value you can possibly create. Some stories will get ignored. Some will be low priority. Some will be combined and some will be split. Some things the user said will be contradictory. Some will be outright lies. Some will be incomplete. It's all good. It's just crap the user happened to say. Not divine directives from the mouths of the gods directly to you.
This revised set of user stories drives the sprint. Now you start collaborating with the users to get the details, write test cases, define acceptance, etc., etc.
As you're sprinting toward delivery, the users can continue to say crap that will get appended to the backlog of unimplemented user stories. It's very, very important to allow the users to say any crap they want to say. It's a good thing to let them ramble.