Supposing user stories aren’t the best technique, what other strategies suffice as a major aspect of assembling Agile prerequisites?
In his article, Kerievsky advocates for the incorporation of ‘Variable Length Iterations’ in place of story points or user stories (https://www.industriallogic.com/blog/stop-using-story-points/). Having attended a Washington, DC, conference, dubbed ‘Agile2007’ and hearing David Anderson talk about his Kanban strategy, Kerievsky integrated the new length iterations into his organization. This unique procedure enabled his team to pick a little measure of essential work to do, complete that job, ship it, and rehash. Unlike the variable length iterations blend with the organization’s end targets and objectives (shipping), and not working in resolute time boxes (Kerievsky). Utilizing story points, in previous periods, compelled the workforce to deliver commitments on time, compromising the quality and eminence of the end product or service.
Are user stories only functional in the implementation of iteration development?
No. Quite contrastingly, user stories encompass a multitude of utilities. In Ambler’s article (http://www.agilemodeling.com/artifacts/userStory.htm), user stories articulate the impact of verbal correspondence. Written instructions, unlike verbal, are extremely uncertain, and offer no assurance that a client and engineer will interpret a statement similarly and accurately. The second point of interest of user stories is that developers utilize them promptly as a part of project estimation as well as scheduling. So composed are the stories such that each gives a gauge of how troublesome or time–consuming it will be to create. Engineers often employ user stories in structuring rough sketches such as flow charts in the exhibition of competent logics (Ambler). Equally important is the fact that user stories adjourn detail collection, hence, very useful for time-limited projects.