`
| |
|
Sunday, July 8th, 2012
| A |
Acceptance Criteria/Test, Automation, A/B Testing, Adaptive Planning, Appreciative inquiry |
| B |
Backlog, Business Value, Burndown, Big Visible Charts, Behavior Driven Development, Bugs, Build Monkey, Big Design Up Front (BDUF) |
| C |
Continuous Integration, Continuous Deployment, Continuous Improvement, Celebration, Capacity Planning, Code Smells, Customer Development, Customer Collaboration, Code Coverage, Cyclomatic Complexity, Cycle Time, Collective Ownership, Cross functional Team, C3 (Complexity, Coverage and Churn), Critical Chain |
| D |
Definition of Done (DoD)/Doneness Criteria, Done Done, Daily Scrum, Deliverables, Dojos, Drum Buffer Rope |
| E |
Epic, Evolutionary Design, Energized Work, Exploratory Testing |
| F |
Flow, Fail-Fast, Feature Teams, Five Whys |
| G |
Grooming (Backlog) Meeting, Gemba |
| H |
Hungover Story |
| I |
Impediment, Iteration, Inspect and Adapt, Informative Workspace, Information radiator, Immunization test, IKIWISI (I’ll Know It When I See It) |
| J |
Just-in-time |
| K |
Kanban, Kaizen, Knowledge Workers |
| L |
Last responsible moment, Lead time, Lean Thinking |
| M |
Minimum Viable Product (MVP), Minimum Marketable Features, Mock Objects, Mistake Proofing, MOSCOW Priority, Mindfulness, Muda |
| N |
Non-functional Requirements, Non-value add |
| O |
Onsite customer, Opportunity Backlog, Organizational Transformation, Osmotic Communication |
| P |
Pivot, Product Discovery, Product Owner, Pair Programming, Planning Game, Potentially shippable product, Pull-based-planning, Predictability Paradox |
| Q |
Quality First, Queuing theory |
| R |
Refactoring, Retrospective, Reviews, Release Roadmap, Risk log, Root cause analysis |
| S |
Simplicity, Sprint, Story Points, Standup Meeting, Scrum Master, Sprint Backlog, Self-Organized Teams, Story Map, Sashimi, Sustainable pace, Set-based development, Service time, Spike, Stakeholder, Stop-the-line, Sprint Termination, Single Click Deploy, Systems Thinking, Single Minute Setup, Safe Fail Experimentation |
| T |
Technical Debt, Test Driven Development, Ten minute build, Theme, Tracer bullet, Task Board, Theory of Constraints, Throughput, Timeboxing, Testing Pyramid, Three-Sixty Review |
| U |
User Story, Unit Tests, Ubiquitous Language, User Centered Design |
| V |
Velocity, Value Stream Mapping, Vision Statement, Vanity metrics, Voice of the Customer, Visual controls |
| W |
Work in Progress (WIP), Whole Team, Working Software, War Room, Waste Elimination |
| X |
xUnit |
| Y |
YAGNI (You Aren’t Gonna Need It) |
| Z |
Zero Downtime Deployment, Zen Mind |
Posted in Agile | No Comments »
Tuesday, April 20th, 2010
At the Agile Coach Camp Goa 2010, we had a small side discussion about the difference between Use Case and User Stories. More importantly, if an Use Case contains many User stories or whether an User Story contains many Use Cases.
According to Mike Cohn, User Stories are smaller in scope compared to Use Cases.
Even Martin Fowler has the same understanding.
IMHO it does not matter. But it’s important to note that when some people refer to User Stories, they really mean the final stage of the User Story. Hence they always say, an Use Case contains many User Stories. In real world, I see User Stories have a life-cycle. They start out big & vague and gradually are thin sliced to executable User Stories. Mike Cohn referes to them as Theme > Epic > Story > Task.
I’m particularly influenced by Jeff Patton’s Work on this topic. Jeff highlights that User Stories really need to be at an User Goal level rather than an implementation level (at least when you start out). Else it would lead to big-upfront-design. Also most users won’t be able to relate to really granular stories. Highly recommend reading his blog on The Mystery of Shrinking Stories.
To understand the overall approach check out his User Story Mapping Slides.
Posted in Agile, Analysis, Design, Planning | 2 Comments »
|
