Common Pitfalls in Agile Projects: Requirements, Planning, and Stakeholder Engagement
Agile methodology has revolutionized how we approach development projects, whether it’s software or product implementation. By promoting flexibility, collaboration, and iterative improvements, it provides a framework for responding to change efficiently. However, while the theory of agile is widely accepted, its implementation often reveals significant challenges. Even seasoned teams can struggle with common pitfalls that disrupt the flow of work, cause project delays, and ultimately impact the quality of the product.
In my experience over the past several year working with various clients, I have witnessed firsthand how these issues manifest, particularly when agile is not properly supported by key practices. From incomplete user stories to poor stakeholder engagement, the hurdles in agile implementation are numerous and often interrelated. This post will highlight some of the most prevalent issues I've encountered, particularly around sprint planning and execution. I'll also provide practical solutions to overcome these obstacles and help ensure that agile methodologies live up to their potential for delivering high-quality software on time and within scope.
User stories are the foundation of agile development. They capture what the user wants to achieve, illustrates the business process for a given task, and gives the development team direction on what to build. However, a common mistake is accepting user stories that are incomplete or vague, leaving too much room for interpretation. This leads to issues where developers either misinterpret what is needed or make assumptions that do not align with the user's expectations.
The Pitfall:
When a user story is not detailed enough, it leads to confusion and inconsistent outcomes. The story must provide a clear, concise description of what the user needs in order to complete a task, and provide examples when possible. It should also express the context of the task, not just its functional requirements. Without a full understanding of both the “how” and "why" behind the story, developers may end up building something that technically works but doesn’t meet the user’s actual needs.
Example:
For example, a story that simply says, "As a user, I want to search for products" is too high-level. It doesn’t provide details on what filters should be available, what kind of search logic should be implemented (e.g., fuzzy search, exact match), or even what the expected result format should be. When this happens, the development team makes assumptions, which often results in rework when stakeholders review the implementation and realise it’s not what they wanted.
Solution:
Invest Time in Story Refinement: Before the sprint begins, the project manager and stakeholders need to engage with the development team to refine stories. This process ensures that the story captures both the user’s needs and the business context.
Break Down Large Stories: Often, vague stories are the result of attempting to tackle too much at once. Splitting them into smaller, more manageable stories helps clarify the details and reduce ambiguity.
Use a Consistent Template: A user story template can help guide the creation of stories by ensuring that key fields such as context, business value, and user expectations are addressed
Acceptance criteria are the measurable and testable requirements that define the success of a user story. While a user story captures what the user wants, the acceptance criteria outline how the development team can prove that the story is completed correctly. Unfortunately, poorly defined or overly vague acceptance criteria are a common problem, often leading to confusion about what constitutes "done."
The Pitfall:
Vague acceptance criteria introduce uncertainty into the development process, particularly when multiple developers are involved. These criteria have to be clear, concrete and discrete. The developer shouldn’t need to have functional expertise in a particular domain in order to show that a feature is working as intended. When teams don’t have clarity on these points, it’s difficult to ensure that the functionality is working correctly, especially when the story spans multiple components, such as back-end logic and front-end UX.
This ambiguity not only makes validation challenging but also sets up the potential for finger-pointing when things go wrong. For instance, a developer working on UX may assume that the calculations being implemented by another team member are correct, only to discover during testing that the integration fails because the criteria weren’t specific enough.
Example:
In one case I encountered, the development of a financial reporting feature was split between two teams: one handling the UX and the other handling the business logic for the calculations. The acceptance criteria provided were something like, "The user can see accurate financial projections after inputting their data." However, no specific calculations were listed, and no examples of input-output pairs were provided to validate the results. When the UX was completed, the calculated results displayed in the interface were incorrect because the two teams weren’t aligned on how the data should be processed, leading to a cascade of issues in the sprint.
Solution:
Be Specific with Acceptance Criteria: Acceptance criteria should not leave room for interpretation. It should clearly define the inputs, processes, and outputs expected. Providing specific examples (e.g., "If the user inputs X, they should see Y") helps both developers and QA validate the functionality.
Collaborate Across Teams: If multiple teams or developers are working on a single story, clear communication is essential. Holding cross-functional discussions to review acceptance criteria ensures everyone understands the dependencies and what needs to be tested.
Introduce Multiple Levels of QA: Acceptance criteria should be structured in such a way that different layers of QA can be applied throughout the build. For example, back-end logic could be validated with unit tests or API calls, while front-end functionality can be tested via UI validation.
Effective prioritisation is key to the success of any agile project. With limited time and resources available in each sprint, ensuring that the most critical stories are worked on first helps deliver maximum business value. However, failure to correctly prioritise stories is a common issue that leads to inefficiencies, misaligned expectations, and missed deadlines.
The Pitfall:
Prioritisation issues often arise when there is a disconnect between the development team, the project manager, and the customer stakeholders. Without a clear understanding of what provides the most value to the business, teams might spend time working on lower-impact features while more critical functionality is delayed. This can lead to scenarios where essential stories are either incomplete by the end of the sprint or not even started, causing delays that ripple across future sprints.
Another related issue occurs when technical debt is overlooked in favor of delivering new features. Ignoring maintenance and refactoring can lead to system instability and more bugs, which ultimately slow down progress in future sprints.
Example:
On another project I worked on, an external stakeholder prioritized stories around minor UX enhancements and fixes over addressing core functionality related to calculation logic. The UX story was completed, but when it came time for user acceptance testing for the sprint, all the stories failed because the logic was incorrect. This misstep in prioritisation not only delayed key functionality but also disrupted the entire project timeline, forcing the team to work overtime to meet critical deadlines. In this case, this was an error on the part of the development team, project manager, and solutions architect. As consultants, it’s our job to prevent these types of mistakes; we can’t be afraid to say “no” to a client when we see them heading towards trouble.
Solution:
Collaborate on Prioritisation: The project manager and the development team must work closely together to ensure that the backlog is properly prioritised based on business value. Developers can provide insight into the technical complexities of certain stories, which helps the project manager make more informed decisions about what should be prioritised.
Use Prioritisation Frameworks: Introducing frameworks like MoSCoW (Must have, Should have, Could have, Won’t have) can help project managers and teams objectively determine what’s most important for the sprint. This approach prevents low-priority features from being prioritised over critical functionality.
Backlog Grooming: Conduct regular backlog grooming sessions where the entire team can assess upcoming stories and ensure priorities align with business goals. These sessions also offer an opportunity to identify any technical debt or critical infrastructure work that may need to be prioritised alongside new features.
Consider Dependencies: Pay close attention to story dependencies during prioritisation. A story that is a blocker for other tasks should typically be moved to the top of the list. By addressing dependencies early, you ensure smoother progress across the sprint and reduce the risk of bottlenecks.
By adopting a more structured and collaborative approach to prioritisation, teams can focus on delivering the highest value work first, ensuring smoother sprints and a more predictable delivery schedule.
These common challenges—vague user stories, unclear acceptance criteria, and poor prioritisation—can derail even the most experienced Agile teams. Addressing them early builds a stronger foundation for predictable, high-quality delivery.
In the next post, we’ll look at two critical—but often overlooked—factors in Agile success: stakeholder involvement and team workload management. These human elements can make or break a sprint, no matter how solid your process.
Digital transformation doesn’t end at go-live. Learn how to sustain momentum through continuous optimisation, agile practices, and long-term support to maximise your investment.