Ten field-tested story-splitting frameworks to translate epics into measurable outcomes — by LeverX Lead Business Analyst Anatoli Valakhanovich and Senior Business Analyst Aliaksei Akhrameika.
Even when a sprint rolls on and developers ship something, the business still fails to perceive meaningful progress. From our own observations, that gap often results from insufficient story splitting.
Senior Business Analyst Aliaksei Akhrameika framed it this way:
“If your split leaves the user waiting, you’ve just cut code, not value.”
At LeverX’s recent Analyst Day, Aliaksei walked our BA community through the insights from industry practice in user story breakdown. This article distills those lessons into ten robust techniques for you to apply in your backlog-grooming, agile roadmap design, and sprint-delivery practice.
Splitting stories is often misunderstood as “making them smaller.” But a story that doesn’t start with real user value can’t produce valuable smaller pieces later. You can’t slice an onion into a cheeseburger.
Let’s look at the ground we should stand on.
We didn’t stop at theory. Through a series of internal knowledge-sharing sessions at LeverX, our BA teams, under the guidance of Anatoli Valakhanovich and Aliaksei Akhrameika, tested 40 story decomposition techniques. This study later became the foundation of a book co-authored by LeverX experts.
Now comes the distilled toolkit.
Once you have a decent (though possibly large) story in hand, the next step is to apply a story-splitting pattern, deliberately chosen to match your specific scenario.
Let’s walk through ten techniques.
The first technique Aliaksei highlights is event-based decomposition — structuring a system around the key events that trigger its behavior.
In essence, we break down a product into parts based on the system reactions. These events are critical touchpoints.
This technique is often overlooked, partly because it is embedded within other techniques (for example, decomposition by role or by scenario) and partly because it is perceived as too technical or secondary. That’s a misconception.
In practice, event-based analysis helps us to:
Now, let’s move to a completely different analytical angle. If event-based story splitting focuses on system logic, the following technique focuses on human intent.
According to this method, each user's goal corresponds to a set of stories that help them achieve it. In other words, instead of structuring stories around actions, this method organizes them around user motivations and intentions.
For example, a single function like “Add to Favorites” may serve several distinct goals: saving for later, tracking discounts, or comparing products before purchase.
This approach helps teams to:
The next approach takes us away from user behavior and brings our focus to change management.
Every system contains elements that change frequently and others that remain stable for years. Volatility-based story splitting differentiates between these two layers and isolates them. By separating volatile from stable areas, teams can make updates quickly without endangering system stability.
For example, the original user story is split into a backend story and a frontend story. Suppose there is a large gap in the team between backend and frontend developers and their subtasks — the backend work progresses ahead, with frontend work following.
Even though this may at first glance seem slower than having both teams work fully in parallel, this approach makes sense under certain business conditions.
Fewer cross-dependencies mean less stress during change, namely it helps to:
The next technique focuses on eliminating redundancy across features.
DRY principle (Don’t Repeat Yourself) is a classic but powerful: avoid duplicating functionality across multiple stories.
If the same logic or functionality appears more than three times, it’s time to extract it into a shared component, module, or library. For instance, instead of rewriting email/SMS notification logic for each feature, we create a unified notification service with reusable templates.
The outcome is significant:
But again, in every case, utilize what suits you; there is no silver bullet. If, for instance, your team is working in highly regulated domains, the following method might be worth your attention.
It’s a go-to story splitting technique for policy-driven domains. For example, in complex systems like Airbnb, Shopify, and Booking.com, business rules (e.g., tax regimes, payment limits, or eligibility conditions) define how the system behaves. Each rule becomes a self-contained story that can be tested, updated, and localized independently.
For example, when designing an order form, separate stories might cover:
Now, let’s shift to an approach for projects under tight timelines.
When speed matters, the functional priority technique helps teams focus on what is most critical for business. This user story breakdown is especially effective in MVP launches or risk-driven product stages, ensuring that teams build the foundation before focusing on decorative refinements.
For instance, in online banking, two-factor authentication represents a high-priority feature, while theme customization falls into low priority.
This story-splitting approach helps deliver core functionality quickly and manage risks, though there’s always a chance of deprioritized elements getting delayed for too long.
On the other hand, if your team prioritizes long-term scalability over short-term urgency, the next approach is the right fit for you.
This method structures delivery around product releases (V1, V2, V3), each expanding functionality while maintaining transparency and strategic pacing.
An example from analytics platforms illustrates the logic:
The technique provides a clear roadmap and simplifies marketing and sales planning.
On the flip side, it demands rigorous dependency management and scope control. Without it, you expose yourself to risks such as one version stalling another, overloaded release bundles, or significant delays.
Moving to a more experimental approach, let’s consider A/B testing.
A/B split testing reframes user-story creation as controlled experimentation rather than a single deterministic choice. Instead of committing to a single implementation, the team creates two or more variants to test competing hypotheses.
The goal is to choose the option that delivers the best metrics (conversion, retention, CTR, etc.). For example, in an e-commerce “Checkout” story, Variant A might include one “Place Order” button, while Variant B adds “Buy in 1 Click.”
This decomposition approach is powerful because it:
To leverage this user story decomposition effectively, several conditions must be met:
If your main challenge is complexity or unclear requirements, the following approach will help.
This two-part method balances research and delivery.
A Spike represents a research-oriented story. It allows you to explore unknown aspects — technical integrations, performance limits, or feasibility questions. It produces insight, not functionality. Typically, a spike lasts no more than one sprint, avoiding the trap of endless exploration.
A Slice, by contrast, translates that learning into small, functional increments — “mini-features” that deliver immediate user value.
This combination reduces risk, improves predictability and accelerates value delivery.
Since a team separates “learning work” from “delivery work” while keeping both aligned, they typically can:
Finally, let’s look at an approach centered on delivery pathways.
The final user story breakdown focuses on how value reaches the user and through which channels it is delivered.
Delivery mechanism breakdown divides stories by technical pathways — UI elements, API integrations, external systems, or notification services. It helps reveal integration dependencies early and ensures that the architecture supports a consistent delivery flow.
Communication channel decomposition, on the other hand, focuses on the user experience layer (email, SMS, push notifications), determining how users are informed or engaged.
The two approaches complement each other.
Used together, these techniques:
No single story splitting method fits every project. Experienced analysts combine them based on context, system maturity, and delivery goals.
For example:
When done well, it shortens delivery loops and makes collaboration easier. It’s also how business analysts earn trust: by showing the team and stakeholders that we can see the whole picture while shaping it piece by piece.
If it can’t be completed within one sprint or still mixes multiple roles or business rules, it’s too large. Check whether each story can independently deliver visible value.
Splitting provides the granularity you need to assign real value and timing to each piece. It’s what makes agile roadmaps more accurate than Gantt charts.
Continuously — during grooming, sprint planning, and even retrospectives when new dependencies emerge.
Ask one question: Would the user notice this story if it shipped alone? If not, it’s too granular.