User Testing Requires Story Changes

Last post 05:10 am September 16, 2015
by John James
2 replies
Author
Messages
06:25 am September 15, 2015

Hi All, apologies if this has been discussed before, but I would appreciate any advice and thoughts on the following area: .......

We have developed a prototype application based on workshops with our users and their close collaboration. The workshop resulted an a sprint of stories that we completed and delivered to time meeting all of our acceptance criteria. However when we conducted some usability tests with the they identified some changes that were necessary to make the solution operate as needed.

In this circumstance, would these changes be new stories, or should the current stories fail and be revised for these additional and amended needs? If they fail, do they need to be carried over into the next sprint as a priority? We delivered a working shippable prototype so in one respect we can successfully leave the sprint and in another is was not quite right.

What is best practice for this area, what do your teams do in this circumstance please?

Thank you for any insights you can provide.

03:13 pm September 15, 2015

> In this circumstance, would these changes be
> new stories, or should the current stories fail
> and be revised for these additional and amended needs?

A user story is a placeholder for a conversation. Those conversations will presumably have happened in order to develop the prototype. Now that the prototype has been delivered those conversations are in the past, and the relevant stories should be retired.

In light of the experience gained with the prototype, new conversations ought to happen through which improvements can be made. Those should be represented as new stories with new estimates for the associated work. The stories may reference previous retired ones if it helps to clarify context.

05:10 am September 16, 2015

Many thanks Ian, your reply makes a lot of sound sense and I think it would definitely be the best way forward for my teams circumstances.
Thanks again, John