Skore processes & UML, when the story is missing

Skore allows you map activity diagram that you can do in UML as well.

Here is a comparison with an example of UML Activity diagram I have found on wikipedia.

It describes how a brainstorming session works.

Activity conducting” by Gwaur – Own work. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

You should take a close look at it, but here are my findings

  • First, it doesn’t really tell me a story.
  • Why are the warm-up exercises only of inexperienced participants?
  • Who suggests new leads when the group is running out of ideas?
  • Why when everybody present their ideas, these ideas are not recorded?
  • What do the outcomes of “Elaborate on idea” (one, more, none) mean?
  • In the process I need to check twice if there is some time left !

I find that this diagram makes the process of a brainstorming particularly rigid and confusing. It is not inspiring.

Now, my suggestion on how to do it in Skore.

I have tried to

  • Tell a story
  • Put each activity in a context so we understand better their added value
  • Assign responsibilities to each box (who leads the activity)


Skore (Tue Nov 11 2014 10-12-14)



Benefits of using Skore

  • I see the added value of each activity in the brackets, UML completely omits this information. For example, the part about “select most associated ideas” is very hard to understand without context.
  • I see the main 3 phases of my process  (yes, you could do that in UML too!)
  • I see who is the lead on the activities. From the UML is not clear what are the roles of the facilitators, participants, etc.

Leave a Reply