User Story without direct business value
While grooming an User Story we came to the conclusion that it should be divided in 2 stories, otherwise the story would cost too much points.
STORIES AFTER SPLIT
A. As an technical analyst I want the development team to collect data, so I they can show it to me by realising the next story:
B. As an technical analyst I want to be able to analyse certain data, so I can recognise technical problems with parts of our product and take action to prevent problems.
QUESTIONS
1. Story A and B will be delivered in the same sprint. Had it been better not to split the story at all and just give it a massive amount of points?
2. Isn't this weird, story A does not have any business value without delivering story B
3. Should the stakeholder in A be replaced by "development team"?
Curious what your thoughts are :)
Why doesn't item A provide any value to the Product Owner? If data is gathered, is there really no value in it unless item B is implemented?
Remember that with many MVP's the elicitation of data to confirm or repute an hypothesis actually *is* the value.
Value may include statistics, metrics, the early establishment of a useful historical record, or the ability to support an informed manual intervention.
Can we divide it vertically wherein each item includes data collection and analysis both but may be a part of the overall Data structure.
Each consecutive User Story can have analysis to be done on top of the completed data analysis from the previous User Story or Sprint. This will result in the Integrated Increment.
We've looked into Sanjay's solution, but the dev-team did decide that it had too much 'rework' involved.
Ian's comment on MVP's did the trick though. I was not familiar with MVP and had to look it up. It helped me explaining the 'business value' of story A.
@Ian - What is MVP....?