<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: They&#8217;re not User Stories</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/</link>
	<description>Software, Training, Coaching, Writing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:59:05 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: William Gill</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-15236</link>
		<dc:creator>William Gill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 05:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-15236</guid>
		<description>Hi Liz,
I also left a comment at the end of my other post which helps clarify - but I wanted to leave a thought on your comment above.

I totally, 100% agree that quick feedback is important, and delivering the smallest amount of user value quickly is important. However, &#039;usability&#039;, like quality in general, is not a gloss that you paint on to a solution when you&#039;ve finished - usability, and quality, must be built in to the design from day one. This is true, I think, even when you deliver only a small portion of functionality. It&#039;s a bit like bugs in software: what is more efficient? Painting on quality at the end by throwing hundreds of testers at code that is fundamentally poor? Or building quality into the cycle early? It&#039;s the same with usability. 

Also, &#039;usability&#039; doesn&#039;t always mean beautiful, animated, graphics, colours etc... it means clean, smooth user flows, optimised for the major use case and designed with the user in mind. (In fact, quite often beautiful, animated and graphics gets in the way of smooth, clean flows). The &quot;with the user in mind&quot; part is where the &quot;As a User...&quot; user story comes from...

cheers
will.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Liz,<br />
I also left a comment at the end of my other post which helps clarify &#8211; but I wanted to leave a thought on your comment above.</p>
<p>I totally, 100% agree that quick feedback is important, and delivering the smallest amount of user value quickly is important. However, &#8216;usability&#8217;, like quality in general, is not a gloss that you paint on to a solution when you&#8217;ve finished &#8211; usability, and quality, must be built in to the design from day one. This is true, I think, even when you deliver only a small portion of functionality. It&#8217;s a bit like bugs in software: what is more efficient? Painting on quality at the end by throwing hundreds of testers at code that is fundamentally poor? Or building quality into the cycle early? It&#8217;s the same with usability. </p>
<p>Also, &#8216;usability&#8217; doesn&#8217;t always mean beautiful, animated, graphics, colours etc&#8230; it means clean, smooth user flows, optimised for the major use case and designed with the user in mind. (In fact, quite often beautiful, animated and graphics gets in the way of smooth, clean flows). The &#8220;with the user in mind&#8221; part is where the &#8220;As a User&#8230;&#8221; user story comes from&#8230;</p>
<p>cheers<br />
will.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: liz</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-15232</link>
		<dc:creator>liz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2011 20:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-15232</guid>
		<description>Hi Will, I commented at the end of your post, but will write a bit more here.

For me, the user should ideally get the simplest possible thing that will allow the business to get value. That might be something spoinky and beautiful, or it might be cheap and ugly. Maybe it only *starts off* cheap and ugly. Doing more than is useful is as wasteful as doing too little. The only way to know is to get feedback - and often usability isn&#039;t the most useful thing to get feedback *on*.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Will, I commented at the end of your post, but will write a bit more here.</p>
<p>For me, the user should ideally get the simplest possible thing that will allow the business to get value. That might be something spoinky and beautiful, or it might be cheap and ugly. Maybe it only *starts off* cheap and ugly. Doing more than is useful is as wasteful as doing too little. The only way to know is to get feedback &#8211; and often usability isn&#8217;t the most useful thing to get feedback *on*.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Gill</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-15224</link>
		<dc:creator>William Gill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2011 11:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-15224</guid>
		<description>Hi Liz, I was forwarded your post after I posted an article describing exactly the opposite of what you&#039;ve proposed here. :) 

While I accept that there are often cases where you need to build something that the user might not necessarily want or like, like a captcha in a registration process, I would argue that for everything you add and every line of code you write, you understand how that will impact the user. If there is not a positive impact, then why are you doing it? Sure, Fred the marketing guy wants to hype the game release by sending an email, but why did the user give his permission to receive it? If the email is full of Fred&#039;s marketing wishes but gives the user no value, did Fred really get what he wants? Fred gets what he wants when the user gets what they want. If the user gets value, then Fred wins. So focus on what the user wants out of the email. Yes, Fred&#039;s requirements are important - but he only gets what he wants when the user gets value. Understanding what that value is should be at the heart of user story creation.

Here&#039;s the link to my article that I mentioned:
http://blog.williamgill.de/2011/08/25/scrum-user-stories-as-a-user-not-as-a-manager

Cheers,
Will.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Liz, I was forwarded your post after I posted an article describing exactly the opposite of what you&#8217;ve proposed here. <img src='http://lizkeogh.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>While I accept that there are often cases where you need to build something that the user might not necessarily want or like, like a captcha in a registration process, I would argue that for everything you add and every line of code you write, you understand how that will impact the user. If there is not a positive impact, then why are you doing it? Sure, Fred the marketing guy wants to hype the game release by sending an email, but why did the user give his permission to receive it? If the email is full of Fred&#8217;s marketing wishes but gives the user no value, did Fred really get what he wants? Fred gets what he wants when the user gets what they want. If the user gets value, then Fred wins. So focus on what the user wants out of the email. Yes, Fred&#8217;s requirements are important &#8211; but he only gets what he wants when the user gets value. Understanding what that value is should be at the heart of user story creation.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the link to my article that I mentioned:<br />
<a href="http://blog.williamgill.de/2011/08/25/scrum-user-stories-as-a-user-not-as-a-manager" rel="nofollow">http://blog.williamgill.de/2011/08/25/scrum-user-stories-as-a-user-not-as-a-manager</a></p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Will.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sleepyfox</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-14013</link>
		<dc:creator>sleepyfox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:36:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-14013</guid>
		<description>The &#039;misuse of metrics&#039; anti-pattern is an old one, I&#039;ve been ranting about it for years (see my blog post from 2008 http://foxonsoftware.blogspot.com/2008/05/demon-ex-machina.html or my 2009 slides I posted on slideshare here: http://www.slideshare.net/sleepyfox/software-metrics-8411184 )

I have found it illuminating to use FiveWhys to get to the root cause of who benefits from certain metrics or behaviours that come up in story definition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8216;misuse of metrics&#8217; anti-pattern is an old one, I&#8217;ve been ranting about it for years (see my blog post from 2008 <a href="http://foxonsoftware.blogspot.com/2008/05/demon-ex-machina.html" rel="nofollow">http://foxonsoftware.blogspot.com/2008/05/demon-ex-machina.html</a> or my 2009 slides I posted on slideshare here: <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/sleepyfox/software-metrics-8411184" rel="nofollow">http://www.slideshare.net/sleepyfox/software-metrics-8411184</a> )</p>
<p>I have found it illuminating to use FiveWhys to get to the root cause of who benefits from certain metrics or behaviours that come up in story definition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Story Smells: The Valueless Story &#124; Joseph Wilk</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-11116</link>
		<dc:creator>Story Smells: The Valueless Story &#124; Joseph Wilk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:01:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-11116</guid>
		<description>[...] Try and structure narratives using the Feature injection format: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Try and structure narratives using the Feature injection format: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: From Journeyman to Client &#124; upstream agile - software</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-7141</link>
		<dc:creator>From Journeyman to Client &#124; upstream agile - software</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 13:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-7141</guid>
		<description>[...] ideas to the test. Remember that the only valid business value here is to make money. And that the only role that is important here is you as the stakeholder of the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ideas to the test. Remember that the only valid business value here is to make money. And that the only role that is important here is you as the stakeholder of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. B. Rainsberger</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-7087</link>
		<dc:creator>J. B. Rainsberger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 01:48:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-7087</guid>
		<description>This reminds me one of the chapters in The Power of Full Engagement: &quot;What&#039;s the Good /Business/ Reason To Do This?&quot; I ask that question in most storywriting sessions at least once.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This reminds me one of the chapters in The Power of Full Engagement: &#8220;What&#8217;s the Good /Business/ Reason To Do This?&#8221; I ask that question in most storywriting sessions at least once.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Interesting posts 2010-02-06 &#171; The Art of Software Development</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-7067</link>
		<dc:creator>Interesting posts 2010-02-06 &#171; The Art of Software Development</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-7067</guid>
		<description>[...] They’re not User Stories, they&#8217;re Stakeholder Stories [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] They’re not User Stories, they&#8217;re Stakeholder Stories [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Green</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-7042</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Green</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:48:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-7042</guid>
		<description>Since reading your earlier posts on Feature Injection I&#039;ve turned all our stories &quot;upside down&quot; - the result - during the earlier stages of projects, we can talk a language that stakeholders understand and they evaluate the usefulness of a story much sooner - plus they reduce the tendency to subconsciously design the system themselves that often happens when one starts with &quot;I want to...&quot; because they (stakeholder) are least best placed to decide the HOW but the WHY - that&#039;s where they excel. 

In a current project the &#039;man with the money&#039; at our customer&#039;s company took one look at the &quot;In order to&quot; clauses and instantly knew they were the start of his cost-benefit case. These things really smooth the project along.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since reading your earlier posts on Feature Injection I&#8217;ve turned all our stories &#8220;upside down&#8221; &#8211; the result &#8211; during the earlier stages of projects, we can talk a language that stakeholders understand and they evaluate the usefulness of a story much sooner &#8211; plus they reduce the tendency to subconsciously design the system themselves that often happens when one starts with &#8220;I want to&#8230;&#8221; because they (stakeholder) are least best placed to decide the HOW but the WHY &#8211; that&#8217;s where they excel. </p>
<p>In a current project the &#8216;man with the money&#8217; at our customer&#8217;s company took one look at the &#8220;In order to&#8221; clauses and instantly knew they were the start of his cost-benefit case. These things really smooth the project along.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: @NeilRobbins</title>
		<link>http://lizkeogh.com/2010/02/02/theyre-not-user-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-7032</link>
		<dc:creator>@NeilRobbins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:52:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lizkeogh.com/?p=553#comment-7032</guid>
		<description>I love the way that you are flipping the thinking on these things. Saw you speak with Dan North at Skilsmatter a few months ago &amp; one of the biggest &amp; best things I took away was this small &amp; massive change in writing stories. By changing the name to Stakeholder stories you&#039;ve done it again. I think it&#039;s great the way that by paying attention to the language we deploy and changing it in small ways you are challenging (and chaning) the way we think and perceive in such big ways. Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the way that you are flipping the thinking on these things. Saw you speak with Dan North at Skilsmatter a few months ago &amp; one of the biggest &amp; best things I took away was this small &amp; massive change in writing stories. By changing the name to Stakeholder stories you&#8217;ve done it again. I think it&#8217;s great the way that by paying attention to the language we deploy and changing it in small ways you are challenging (and chaning) the way we think and perceive in such big ways. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

