During the review session, the product owner discovers that the user interface has a response time of 10 seconds. The non-functional requirements state that it should respond in less than two seconds. The team complains that this requirement was not communicated to them.
What should have been done to avoid this?
Non-functional requirements, such as response time, should be included in the acceptance criteria of a user story. Acceptance criteria guide the development process by outlining specific conditions that must be met. This ensures that the development team is fully aware of these requirements from the beginning and can work towards meeting them during the development. Including non-functional requirements in the acceptance criteria directly addresses the issue of communication and clarity, thereby preventing misunderstandings about what must be achieved.
Option D can be right. But, why not B? This situation came up in some of my projects
I would go for B because DoD is at project level to set quality standards and not for individual user stories or requirement. It is the acceptance criteria that confirms the requirements are met
C = correct. DoD is more technical, code coverage, security, performance (non-functional)… Describe what to be done from a quality perspective AC is more from a functional perspective. Describe what to be done from functional perspective
B is the right choice. If you read the question carefully, "not communicated to them" is a good keyword that enabled me to choose Option B directly within a few seconds. Because the customer/PO writes acceptance criteria first. Then the team writes the DoD based on the acceptance criteria. The chronological order is very important to answer that question easily. If something was missed in the acceptance criteria, then the team could not see that to write in the DoD. Therefore, it should have been added to the acceptance criteria so that the team could see from there to add a DoD item to meet all sprints by controlling that item.
Option B. Non-functional requirements, such as response time, should be communicated to the development team and included in the acceptance criteria for the user story. This ensures that the team is aware of the requirement and works towards meeting it during development. While creating a comprehensive user story with all non-functional requirements (option A) and adding non-functional requirements to the definition of done (option C) are important, they do not necessarily address the issue at hand, which is the team's lack of awareness of the specific non-functional requirement. A team review of the scope of work (option D) may also be beneficial, but it is not directly related to the issue of non-functional requirements being communicated to the team.
B: acceptance criteria are specific to one particular feature
B will helps prevent misunderstandings and ensures that the team knows the performance expectations from the outset.
I like B. the most. Acceptance criteria for the UI feature/product makes the most sense in terms of ensuring its non-functional requirements are being met. DOD is broader and at the project level. The question is vague enough where B and C could both be correct answers.
I would go with B. The acceptance criteria are more user-centric and guide the development, while the Definition of Done is a set of standards and requirements that need to be fulfilled for the entire product or task.
B correct
By undertaking a team review of the scope the team would not have been ignorant of this nonfunctional requirement.
In the review we only look at done items.
Vote C
To tsangckl : " If the requirement is fairly well understood and is low effort but it only applies to specific backlog items, it may be better to include it as Acceptance Criteria. Because the Acceptance Criteria are the conditions of satisfaction that must be met before a backlog item is acceptable, it needs to be small; something that we can develop and test quickly so that we can have fast feedback loops" So B
I am going with C.
It is hard to decide between B & C.
option B
I go for D because reviewing the scope of work means checking the integrity of the story including DOD and AC. Eliminate A for the issue is specific not including all NFR. Eliminate B and C, for D can check all of them.