Acceptance Criteria Tips and Examples For Crafting High-Performing User Stories In 2024

One of the biggest challenges that prevent teams from reaching their goals and growing products is misalignment. Today, teams try to build a culture of autonomy and a culture of delegation beyond merely delegating tasks. However, the freedom that comes with autonomy involves both responsibility and alignment. In our previous article, we described how User Stories might help teams to achieve this alignment between all the participants in the SDLC process. Now, let’s take a deep dive into one of the tools that help User Stories keep the entire team on the same page.

Failure to meet deadlines and low-quality product releases are often caused by miscommunication and misalignment. The Project Management Institute's Pulse of the Profession reports that for organizations with high project management maturity, 27% of their projects did not meet original goals and business intent. In contrast, those with low PM maturity levels exceeded this number by 47%. Let’s define how acceptance criteria can help with the issue and help your team achieve goals.

Defining Acceptance Criteria

With so many moving parts, it's essential to have a clear and concise set of objectives that everyone can agree on.

Acceptance criteria (AC) help to ensure that all stakeholders are working towards the same goal by defining what conditions a software product should satisfy so that we can release it to customers. In addition, AC help to identify potential risks early on in the SDLC, saving time and money in the long run. Whether you have a seasoned team of experts in software development or are just getting started, make sure to include them in your next project for a successful outcome. AC are used to:

• determine whether a User Story is ready for release;
• assess the quality level of this product before release;
• make sure the product meets the needs of the customer’s business;
• keep User Stories clear, understandable, and achievable.

AC help verify that a User Story meets all of the necessary requirements. If any of the AC are not met, the feature should be improved before it can be accepted and released.

Agile also uses a similar tool – Definition of Done – to measure the readiness of features to be released. The difference between them can be difficult to understand. However, it is critical for Product Owners to know the distinction. This is so they do not mistake one set of requirements for another in order to complete their tasks on time with quality standards maintained throughout all stages.

The Definition Of Done (DoD) defines what criteria every product increment has to meet before it can be considered finished, according to Scrum Guide. The difference between DoD and AC is that the former applies to all user stories. However, AC vary for each User Story depending on what requirements need to be fulfilled.

What are Acceptance Criteria Used For?

AC are imperative for any project in order to ensure that the feature meets all the necessary requirements. They provide a clear, concise, and measurable definition of what needs to be delivered in order to mark the product feature as a success. Software development acceptance criteria should be decided upon before work on the feature begins. They can be used to assess whether a deliverable is complete and fit for purpose or used as a tool for communication between different stakeholders involved in the project.

• Expectation management. Acceptable AC should have clear boundaries so that there is no ambiguity in interpretation. The answer should be either yes/no or pass/fail.
• Scope changes management. Scope changes are a major risk for product engineering teams. If you don't have clear goals from the beginning, it can be difficult to stay on track with your work. This can result in unexpected delays or costs along the way that could throw off any schedule going forward.
• Commitment instrument. It is imperative to arrive at a shared understanding with the client. If they feel like you don’t meet all of your commitments, well-documented acceptance criteria will address any ambiguity that might exist.
• Estimation optimization. The more specific a team is about the boundaries of their tasks, the higher the chances that they will have an accurate estimate of how long each task should take. AC help to set and align with these boundaries.
• Testing optimization. AC help you to write test cases, check whether your system performs as expected, and provide an improvement or modification guide.

Who Writes Acceptance Criteria and When?

Usually,  Product Owners (POs) are responsible of creating an acceptance criteria to ensure that the team would deliver user stories according to the customer's or end user's needs, rarely – the Scrum team. As such, they are in a good position to determine what AC should be met, and hence build an acceptance criteria list for the team to follow.

To exclude mistakes and low-quality development, AC should be created prior to development work beginning on a User Story so that all parties have a shared understanding of what remains to be delivered. Ideally, AC should be created and understood by the team before the beginning of the sprint. This ensures that everyone on the team is on the same page regarding what needs to be accomplished.

How to Write a Good Acceptance Criteria

AC can be used to test the product before release. They should be clear, concise, understandable, and measurable so that it is possible to determine if they have been met or not. They should also be achievable, meaning that they are realistic given the resources and timeframe of the project. In practice, AC consist largely of test scenarios that aim at confirming whether or not the application works as expected.

AC can be revisited and updated during development as more information about the product becomes known. However, all changes to AC should be agreed upon by PO and other stakeholders before being implemented.

Acceptance Criteria Types and Structures

AC can be scenarios or rules. In rare cases, teams introduce their own versions of AC structures to fit their specific needs. Here, we’ll dig deeper into the most popular formats.

Both types are key to making sure that features are actually useful to users. AC scenarios help to ensure that features work as intended in real-world settings. In contrast, rule-oriented ones help to ensure that features meet minimum standards for performance and reliability.

Scenario-oriented acceptance criteria

This type of approach is useful for complex features that will be used in multiple ways. This type of AC list helps to ensure that the final product will help users in a variety of scenarios. For example, if the development team is working on a new search feature, the scenario-oriented AC might specify that the feature must be able to handle misspellings and return results from different parts of the website. In addition, it can also help to identify potential problems during development, allowing team members to make changes before the product is released. The common formula that represents the AC scenario is as follows:

• Given {pre-condition}
• When {action}
• Then {results}

Using this approach, testers start by writing test cases for each feature. They then use these test cases to drive the development process, ensuring that each feature meets the required standards. This approach has a plethora of benefits, including improved coverage and reduced development time.

Rule-based acceptance criteria format

Some backlog items need another approach to writing AC rather than the Given/When/Then for objective reasons.

• System-level requirements (such as beta testing and alpha releases with volatile data sets) wouldn’t benefit from Given/When/Then structures;
• Given/When/Then cannot describe UX specifics that can be critically important;
• There is simply no need to cover details about test scenarios to your customers.

AC rules, unlike previous ones, aim to specify conditions to be met in order for the feature to be considered complete. For the search feature example, AC rules might determine that it must be able to handle at least 10 simultaneous searches and return results within 2 seconds.

Examples of Acceptance Criteria

Let’s examine several AC to learn what differs in these structures and choose what fits you best. (By the way, for learning how to minimize the chance of missed deadlines, read our guide to writing high-value User Stories blog.)

Common Challenges and Solutions for Writing Acceptance Criteria

Writing acceptance criteria is a crucial part of the Agile development process, serving as a benchmark for when features or tasks are considered complete. However, teams often face challenges that can impede the effectiveness of these criteria.

Recognizing these common pitfalls and implementing strategies to overcome them can significantly enhance the clarity and functionality of acceptance criteria. At Techstack, we follow a clear how-to guide to write acceptance criteria and deliver software products successfully.

One frequent challenge is ambiguity. Acceptance criteria that are not clearly defined can lead to misunderstandings between stakeholders and the development team, resulting in rework and delays.

To combat this, acceptance criteria should be specific, measurable, and written in simple language. Employing an acceptance criteria sample as a reference can ensure consistency and clarity.

Another challenge is the assumption of implicit knowledge. Sometimes, criteria are written with the assumption that everyone has the same level of understanding about the project. This can be problematic for new team members or when working across departments.

To avoid this, ensure that acceptance criteria are comprehensive and self-explanatory, providing enough context for anyone unfamiliar with the project to understand the requirements.

Overly complex or technical acceptance criteria pose another challenge, making it difficult for non-technical stakeholders to engage in the process.

The solution is to write criteria in a way that is accessible to all stakeholders, focusing on outcomes rather than technical specifications. This encourages broader participation and ensures that the criteria reflect the needs and perspectives of all parties involved.

A lack of collaboration in writing acceptance criteria can result in misalignment between the development team and stakeholders. To prevent this, involve representatives from all relevant groups in the criteria development process.

This collaborative approach fosters mutual understanding, aligns expectations, and leverages diverse insights to refine and improve the acceptance criteria.

By addressing these challenges with clear, inclusive, and collaborative strategies, teams can develop effective acceptance criteria that serve as a solid foundation for the successful delivery of software products.

Quick Summary of Acceptance Criteria

One of the challenges that prevent teams from reaching business goals and growing products is misalignment. Without AC, there is a risk that the story will be poorly understood or implemented, leading to frustration on both sides. With AC in place, however, both the customer and the Scrum team have confidence that the product will meet their needs.

• Backlog items must meet AC to be considered complete.
• Scrum teams typically agree on them after the PO sets them.
• By clearly defining the accepted criteria upfront, agile teams can avoid scope creep and failure to meet stakeholder expectations.

By following these guidelines, AC helps deliver product functionality that users will actually find useful.