User story mapping for backlog management and outcome-based prioritization. Load during Phase 2.5 (User Story Mapping) to produce story-map.md and prioritization.md.
Create story maps that organize user stories spatially by activity and priority, then slice releases by outcome impact. Reference: Jeff Patton, "User Story Mapping" (2014). Integrates outcome-based prioritization from Gothelf/Seiden and riskiest-assumption-first from Maurya.
| Element | Position | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Backbone | Top row, left-to-right | User activities in chronological order -- the spine of the journey |
| Ribs | Columns under each activity | User tasks broken down vertically by detail and priority |
| Walking Skeleton | Horizontal line across all activities | Thinnest possible end-to-end working flow. Not an MVP -- it is the minimum slice that connects ALL activities |
| Release Slices | Horizontal bands below skeleton | Coherent groups of stories, each adding incremental value tied to a specific outcome |
Visual structure:
Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Task A.1 Task B.1 Task C.1 Task D.1 <- Walking Skeleton
........... ........... ........... ........... <- skeleton line
Task A.2 Task B.2 Task C.2 Task D.2 <- Release 1
Task A.3 Task B.3 <- Release 1
Task B.4 Task C.3 Task D.3 <- Release 2
Identify the user persona and their end-to-end goal. One map per persona-goal pair.
Write the big activities left-to-right in chronological order. These are verb phrases: "Search products", "Compare options", "Complete purchase". Aim for 4-8 activities.
Under each activity, list the tasks that support it. Write as short action phrases (user behaviors). Place more detail and less critical tasks lower.
Reorder tasks within each column: most critical at top, nice-to-have at bottom. Ask: "Which task is essential for this activity to work at all?"
Draw a horizontal line that captures exactly one task from each activity -- the thinnest slice that delivers end-to-end flow. Every activity must be represented. If an activity has no task above the line, the skeleton is incomplete.
Group remaining tasks into horizontal bands. Each band targets a specific outcome KPI. Name each release by the outcome it achieves, not the features it contains.
Prioritize releases by outcome impact, not feature completeness. Each release slice targets a specific measurable behavior change.
Value (outcome impact) x Urgency (time-sensitivity) / Effort (complexity) = Priority Score
Where (1-5 scale):
From Running Lean (Maurya): validate what could kill the product before optimizing what improves it.
| Priority | What to validate | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | Walking skeleton | Does the end-to-end flow work at all? |
| 2nd | Release targeting riskiest assumption | Could this assumption kill the product? |
| 3rd | Release targeting highest-value outcome | Which behavior change drives the most impact? |
| 4th+ | Remaining releases by Value x Urgency / Effort | Incremental value delivery |
Each release slice maps to the logic model chain (Gothelf/Seiden):
Release Slice -> Output (features built)
-> Outcome (behavior change: [Who] [Does what] [By how much])
-> Impact (business KPI moved)
# Story Map: {feature-name}
## User: {persona}
## Goal: {what they're trying to accomplish}
## Backbone
| Activity 1 | Activity 2 | Activity 3 | Activity N |
|------------|------------|------------|------------|
| Task 1.1 | Task 2.1 | Task 3.1 | Task N.1 |
| Task 1.2 | Task 2.2 | Task 3.2 | |
| | Task 2.3 | | |
---
### Walking Skeleton
{List the minimum tasks from each activity that form the thinnest end-to-end slice}
### Release 1: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}
### Release 2: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}
# Prioritization: {feature-name}
## Release Priority
| Priority | Release | Target Outcome | KPI | Rationale |
|----------|---------|---------------|-----|-----------|
| 1 | Walking Skeleton | End-to-end flow works | {KPI} | Validates core assumption |
| 2 | {name} | {outcome} | {KPI} | {why this order} |
## Backlog Suggestions
| Story | Release | Priority | Outcome Link | Dependencies |
|-------|---------|----------|-------------|--------------|
| US-01 | WS | P1 | {KPI-1} | None |
| US-02 | R1 | P2 | {KPI-2} | US-01 |
> **Note**: In Phase 2.5, stories are task-level placeholders (e.g., "Search by category").
> Story IDs (US-01) are assigned in Phase 4 (Requirements). Revisit this table after Phase 4.
| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Feature-first slicing | Release 1 = all of Feature A, Release 2 = all of Feature B. No end-to-end value until late. | Slice ACROSS features by outcome. Each release touches multiple activities. |
| No walking skeleton | Going deep on one activity before connecting end-to-end. Late integration risk. | Draw the skeleton first. One task per activity, thinnest possible. |
| Fat walking skeleton | Too many stories crammed into the skeleton. Defeats the purpose. | Skeleton = exactly the minimum to make the flow work. Move extras to Release 1. |
| Effort-based priority | Ordering by "easy first" instead of outcome impact. Delivers low-value features early. | Prioritize by Value x Urgency / Effort. Easy-but-low-value stories go to later releases. |
| Orphan stories | Stories with no outcome link. No measurable behavior change targeted. | Every story traces to an outcome KPI. If it cannot, question its value. |
| Activity gaps | Some activities have no tasks in a release slice. Breaks end-to-end coherence. | Walking skeleton covers all activities. Later releases may skip activities only if those are already sufficient. |