The current Kanbo prototype refers to the cards you drag around the board as ‘stories’, but depending on the flavour of agile development you are pursuing, it should instead have tasks, or even both stories and tasks.
The difference between stories and tasks is something it is possible to get confused, especially as while most people know what task means, the way we use the word ‘story’ is peculiar to software development. A user story is rougly the same as a use case or a feature: it describes a change in the behaviour of the system that the customer desires, from the point of view of someone using it. A story is less formally described than a use case. It is supposed to be a little more than a unique ID or short name and a one- paragraph, (preferably one-sentence) description. The name reflects the shift to getting the customer to tell stories about how they imagine the system working, instead of getting bogged down in formal requirements analysis.
Stories when scheduled are depomposed in to engineering tasks. A given story may give rise to several tasks. The difference between stories and tasks is that stories are high-level, tasks are low-level; stories come from what the user wants, tasks are things the developers are going do; stories are what and why, tasks are how and when.
This is expressed in the (ideal) form of words classically used to describe them. Stories should be expressibile in the following three-part form:
|, I want to
|(role or person)
Although in practice it is probably snappier to say ‘Customers can search for shoes by size and colour’ than ‘As a customer I want to search for shoes by size and colour so that I may find whether they exist.’ But you do need to be clear on who is interested in this new feature and why they care. It should also be apparant how this new feature would be demonstrated to that person.
A task is simpler: classically a sentence in the imperative voice starting with a verb. ‘Add search page’, ‘Index shoes by size and colour’, ‘Present shoe list as a grid’.
While I’m at it, there is also unplanned work—bugs, glitches, and other defects. Some people try to contort them in to the form of tasks or stories, but I think they are most straightforwardly expressed as a statement of the wrong situation (‘Search page shows error message when there are no search results’, ‘Unpublished articles should not be listed on front page’).
In XP, the schedule is still expressed in terms of stories—liiterally a stack of story cards with a rubber band around them—whereas in Scrum the task board shows tasks, not stories. In Kanban there are no stories, only queues of tasks, planned and unplanned (in other words, development tasks mixed in with maintenance tasks and defects). This is only confusing if you call tasks stories.
So how does this matter to Kanbo? If I want it to be applicable to a variety of develpment styles, then it may be it needs to change whether the cards it shuffles around are called stories or are called tasks. I may also need a separate area where stories (or vague wants not yet specific enough to make a story) can be looked after.