By: Simone Bernardi, Celeris AB
Ever sat through a project meeting thinking, “Who on earth wrote this use case, and why does it read like a database manual?” You’re not alone. Use cases – those simple tools meant to clarify requirements – often become sources of frustration. Instead of a clear story of how a user achieves a goal, we get labyrinthine diagrams and jargon-laden documents that make eyes glaze over. Before we talk about fixing it, let’s own up to the chaos: most businesses get use cases wrong. Below, we’ll highlight some all-too-common pitfalls (with a dose of sarcasm) that turn use cases into a running joke, and then we’ll see how to set them right and actually build business success from chaos.
Common Pitfalls in Use Cases
1. Data-Centric Use Cases (Losing User Focus) – Avoid the CRUD trap (Create, Read, Update, Delete) as use cases. These focus on data operations rather than user goals, leading to fragmented and user-unfriendly systems. Without a clear end-to-end flow, gaps and inefficiencies emerge.
2. Post-Condition Overload (Too Much Detail) – Post-conditions are often poorly written, inconsistent across paths, and hard to maintain. Overcomplicating them turns simple requirements into confusing logic puzzles without adding real value.
3. Fragmented Storylines (The “Star” Anti-Pattern) – Writing isolated use cases for each actor creates a disjointed system. Instead of a seamless user journey, handoffs become awkward, causing gaps and usability issues. A coherent, end-to-end story is essential.
How to fix the chaos and write great use cases
1. Focus on the User’s Journey – Avoid fragmented, CRUD-based use cases by structuring workflows around real user tasks. A single, end-to-end narrative is more effective than disconnected mini-functions.
2. Smarter Use of Post-Conditions – Simplify post-conditions to highlight key success and failure criteria. Overcomplicating them adds unnecessary effort without real value.
3. Better Alignment Across Teams – Well-crafted use cases bridge business goals and technical execution, ensuring clarity for developers, stakeholders, and testers. The result: a system that works both functionally and practically.
