Phone: 650-474-0955

Business Analysis - Use Cases

In my last post on business analysis, I described user stories and gave a comparison between user stories and use cases. In my today's post, I am going to describe use cases.
A use case (a case in the use of a system) is a list of steps, typically defining interactions between a role known as an "actor" and a system to achieve a goal. The actor can be a human or an external system.
There is no standard way to write a use case, and different formats work well in different cases. There are few templates to use for a use case.
Simple Use Case
Title: goal the use case is trying to achieve
Main Success Scenario: numbered list of steps
Step: a simple statement of the interaction between the actor and a system
Extensions: separately numbered lists, one per Extension
Extension: a condition that results in different interactions from the main success scenario. An extension from main step 3 is numbered 3a, an extension from main step 4 is numbered 4a, etc.
Complete Use Case
Title: an active-verb goal phrase that names the goal of the primary actor
Goal in Context
Stakeholders and Interests
Minimal Guarantees
Main Success Scenario
Technology and Data Variations List
Related Information
Casual Use Case
Title: goal
Primary Actor
Story: the body of the use case is simply a paragraph or two of text, informally describing what happens
Example of a Simple Use Case
Use Case Name: Place Order
Actors: Shopper, Fulfillment System, Billing System
Use Case Description: after the user selected items to purchase, user orders the items. The user will provide the payment and shipping information. The system will respond with confirmation of the order and a tracking number that the user can use to check on order status in future. The system will also provide the user with an estimated delivery date for the order which will include all selected items. The user may already have an account with the company with billing and shipping information.
A use case defines the interactions between external actors and the system under consideration to accomplish a goal. Actors must be able to make decisions, but don't to be human. An actor might be a person, a company or organization, a computer program, or a computer system — hardware, software, or both. The term "actors" are frequently interchanged with the term "users".
Actors are always stakeholders, but many stakeholders are not actors, since they never interact directly with the system, even though they have the right to care how the system behaves. For example, the owners of the system, the company's board of directors, and regulatory bodies such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Insurance could all be stakeholders but are unlikely to be actors.
Similarly, a person using a system may be represented as different actors because he is playing different roles. For example, user "Joe" could be playing the role of a Customer when using an Automated Teller Machine to withdraw cash from his own account, or playing the role of a Bank Teller when using the system to restock the cash drawer on behalf of the bank.
Actors are often working on behalf of someone else. If actor is "sales rep for the customer" or "clerk for the marketing department" to capture that the user of the system is acting for someone else. This tells the project that the user interface and security clearances should be designed for the sales rep and clerk, but that the customer and marketing department are the roles concerned about the results.
A stakeholder may play both an active and an inactive role. For example, a Consumer is both a "mass-market purchaser" (not interacting with the system) and a User (an actor, actively interacting with the purchased product). In turn, a User is both a "normal operator" (an actor using the system for its intended purpose) and a "functional beneficiary" (a stakeholder who benefits from the use of the system). For example, when user "Joe" withdraws cash from his account, he is operating the Automated Teller Machine and obtaining a result on his own behalf.
Look for actors among the stakeholders of a system, the primary and supporting (secondary) actors of a use case, the system under design, and finally among the "internal actors", namely the components of the system under design.
The relationships between all the use cases and actors are represented in a Use Case Diagram.
A use case diagram is a graphical representation of a user's interaction with the system and depicting the specifications of a use case. A use case diagram can portray the different types of users of a system and the various ways that they interact with the system. This diagram is typically used in conjunction with the textual use case and is often accompanied by other types of diagrams as well.
While a use case itself might drill into a lot of detail about every possibility, a use case diagram can help provide a higher-level view of the system. They provide the simplified and graphical representation of what the system must actually do.
Limitations of Use cases include: 
  • Use cases are not well suited to capturing non-interaction based requirements of a system (such as algorithm or mathematical requirements) or non-functional requirements (such as platform, performance, timing, or safety-critical aspects). These are better specified declaratively elsewhere. 
  • Use case templates do not automatically ensure clarity. Clarity depends on the skill of the writer(s). 
  • Use cases are complex to write and to understand, for both end users and developers. 
  • As there are no fully standard definitions of use cases, each project must form its own interpretation. 
  • Some use case relationships, such as extensions, are ambiguous in interpretation and can be difficult for stakeholders to understand. 
  • In Agile methodology, simpler user stories are preferred to use cases. 
  • Use case developers often find it difficult to determine the level of user interface (UI) dependency to incorporate in a use case. While use case theory suggests that UI should not be reflected in use cases, it can be awkward to remove this aspect of design, as it makes the use cases difficult to visualize. In software engineering, this difficulty is resolved by applying requirements traceability, for example with a traceability matrix. 
  • Use cases can be over-emphasized. For example, driving system design too literally from use cases, and using use cases to the exclusion of other potentially valuable requirements analysis techniques. 
  • Use cases are a starting point for test design, but since each test needs its own success criteria, use cases may need to be modified to provide separate post-conditions for each path.
(There are no comments yet)
Leave a Comment