A Product Management Insight: Why Ambiguity in User Stories Can Foster Better Outcomes

A Product Management Insight: Why Ambiguity in User Stories Can Foster Better Outcomes

I've been noticing a lot of posts from product managers lately that start something like this:

• A company builds a bar app.
• The QA tester orders a drink "12345"—the app passes.
• The QA tester orders a drink "abcde"—the app passes.
• The QA tester orders "null"—the app passes.
• The QA tester orders "&(&)_#(**((($%^?/”—the app passes.

Then, a customer uses the bar app and asks for the bathroom.

Boom—the app blows up.

I interpret this joke as an illustration of how QA often tests extreme edge cases but may miss real-world scenarios. The typical product management response is to advocate for highly detailed user stories and precise acceptance criteria. But I see it differently.

Overly specific user stories can create their own problems: mini-waterfalls within a sprint, dissatisfaction from testers and developers, and a stifling of creativity. The core issue is that language doesn’t always capture intent accurately. As John Hamilton McWhorter, a linguist at Columbia University, says, "Words do not always mean what they mean."

I think of this in terms of the following comic

Which highlights how literal interpretations of language can lead to poor outcomes.

How Embracing Ambiguity in User Stories Enhances Product Development and Collaboration

Speech and written language can be taken too literally, often with unintended consequences. So, what do you all think? In my experience, the more ambiguous I am in a user story or acceptance criteria, the more it fosters open communication within the team and reduces the risk of misinterpreting requirements that are "set in stone."

#ProductManagement #UserStories #AgileDevelopment #Collaboration #UXDesign #Personas #QA #SoftwareDevelopment #Innovation #CreativeThinking #Teamwork #Ambiguity #ProductDevelopment #CustomerExperience

Personas: Bringing Users to Life for Developers and QA

Personas are fictional characters that represent the different types of users who interact with a product or service. Based on real research and data, they provide a clear picture of the target audience, helping developers and QA testers understand user needs and goals more deeply.

When the users are internal, and developers or QA already know them, it’s even better to use these real people as the persona basis. This makes it easier for the team to relate to and empathize with their perspective, resulting in more thoughtful solutions. Make sure to share persona documents with the entire team, keeping them updated as the users’ needs evolve. I often dedicate workshop time for this, splitting developers into groups to represent different users, defining each persona’s unique problems, and brainstorming potential solutions—without limiting them to what’s currently in the product.

A great approach is to have developers and QA testers spend a "day in the life" of the user. By experiencing the user’s workflow, challenges, and goals firsthand, they can create more meaningful user stories and acceptance criteria that reflect real-world use cases.

For instance, let’s say our user is Tonya, a Merchandising team member. Developers and QA testers could spend a day shadowing Tonya, observing her tasks, interviewing her about her goals and pain points, and gathering feedback on the product or service.

This firsthand experience can then be used to create a well-rounded persona for Tonya, capturing her role, challenges, and preferred working methods. The persona might detail:

• Name: Tonya
• Role: Merchandising team member
• Goals: Add products efficiently?
• Challenges: Time-consuming processes adding new product information

With this persona in hand, developers and QA can craft user stories that are highly relevant to Tonya’s day-to-day needs. For example:

"As a Merchandising team member (Tonya), I want to be able to add products quickly through an input file so that I can reduce the time it takes to update the website in bulk."

Ideally, developers and QA testers should also communicate directly with Tonya. This fosters rapport, builds trust, and allows for real-time feedback, all of which contribute to more accurate and user-focused product development. Letting Tonya know in advance that a developer or QA tester will be reaching out is crucial, as it encourages openness and collaboration.

Minimum Set of Testing: Ensuring the Right Criteria for Success

When it comes to building systems that serve personas like Tonya, I focus on ensuring it supports her day-to-day tasks seamlessly and efficiently. Here’s the minimum set of testing and criteria that I use to guide development:

1. Compatibility with Latest Microsoft Excel Formats
2. Capacity to Load Bulk Products
3. Fast Load Times
4. Data Validation Pre-Processing

By setting this minimum standard for the Tonya system, we ensure it supports both efficiency and accuracy in processing products. Meeting these criteria means that the system will not only align with Tonya's workflow but also help the business achieve larger goals like faster delivery times and improved operational efficiency.

By building on these criteria, the Tonya system can truly become an asset in helping us achieve our broader business objectives. The right testing framework ensures that we aren't just meeting functional requirements—we're also aligning the system with real-world needs and goals.

Collaborating with the Team: Refining User Stories for Maximum Impact

At Refinement, collaboration is key. Both QA and development resources are readily available, allowing for efficient estimation and real-time updates to user stories during refinement sessions. Even while actively working on a story, team members have the flexibility to update details or acceptance criteria as needed. This dynamic, iterative approach fosters a sense of shared ownership across the team, ensuring that everyone contributes to shaping the story as it evolves.

The development team works as a cohesive unit, with developers participating directly in product demonstrations alongside users. This hands-on experience gives them invaluable insights into real-world user challenges and experiences. Moreover, feedback from these demonstrations is shared with the entire team, allowing every member to interpret and integrate valuable user perspectives into their ongoing work.

The Importance of Direct User Feedback

Direct feedback from users is instrumental in validating and reinforcing the personas developed to represent the target audience. By actively listening to users, the team gains a deeper understanding of their daily workflows, pain points, and goals. This, in turn, informs the development of more comprehensive and relevant test cases. By aligning test cases with the actual tasks and processes that users perform regularly, we ensure that the product is not only functional but genuinely helpful to the people who use it.

Embracing a User-Centric Approach

This collaborative and user-centric approach empowers teams at Refinement to deliver high-quality solutions that genuinely address the needs of users. The continuous feedback loop between developers, QA, and users strengthens the final product and ensures that the team stays aligned with user expectations at every stage of development.

Additional Acceptance Criteria and Considerations

In addition to the previously discussed acceptance criteria I assume? developers and QA teams will add some of these types of considerations:

1. Usability for a Diverse Workforce
2. Integration with Existing Systems
3. Scalability for Future Growth

By incorporating these criteria and fostering a culture of collaboration, the team at Refinement ensures that their products are not only high-quality but also aligned with the long-term goals and needs of the business. This holistic approach creates a foundation for delivering solutions that scale, adapt, and ultimately provide value to both the users and the organization.

Conclusion: Embracing Ambiguity for Innovation

In this article, we explored how leveraging ambiguity in user stories and acceptance criteria can enhance communication with the development team and reduce the risk of misinterpreting requirements. By accepting the complexity and fluidity of language, we recognize that words often carry multiple meanings and nuances. Instead of striving for absolute clarity, incorporating a level of ambiguity opens the door to creative thinking, collaboration, and a more user-centric approach to product development.

At the heart of this strategy is the effective use of personas—fictional representations of the different types of users. Personas enable us to understand the needs, goals, and behaviors of our target audience, allowing us to build products that truly resonate with their experiences. By focusing on a minimum set of testing, we concentrate on the most critical elements of the product, ensuring that our efforts deliver maximum value while staying aligned with user needs.

We also reflect on the wisdom of linguist John Hamilton McWhorter, who famously said, "Words do not always mean what they mean." This serves as a reminder of the importance of fostering open dialogue among developers, QA testers, and product managers. Embracing ambiguity promotes an environment where diverse viewpoints are encouraged, leading to innovative solutions that may not emerge in a more rigid framework.

In the end, this approach nurtures a collaborative and user-centric product development process. It empowers teams to look beyond the literal meaning of requirements and explore the deeper intentions behind them, ultimately leading to products that not only meet functional expectations but also deliver delightful, intuitive user experiences.

In essence, embracing ambiguity in user stories and acceptance criteria is a powerful strategy. It sparks creativity, fuels collaboration, and keeps the focus on the user, all while paving the way for more innovative, impactful product development.