Search

Agile Filter

How Not to be Agile – Ultimate Guide to Sprint Planning

IntroductionHello and welcome to this, the fourth article in the series ‘How Not to be Agile’‘How Not to be Agile’ may seem a strange title for blogs about how good Agile is!  What I intend to do over this series of articles is to share with you the misinterpretations, omissions, and mistakes that people make that significantly reduce the potential benefits when an organisation, or part of it, embark on an Agile Transformation.Last time, I discussed the potential pitfalls with respect to the Product Backlog; this time, I will cover some of the misunderstandings and malpractices that I have come across to do with the ‘development timebox’ planning.  The most often used term for the ‘development timebox’ is the Sprint from Scrum; I will use this and other Scrum terminologies in this article but you can use whatever names you like; I shall put single quotes around Scrum role names to indicate that other names may be used.It is the planning, content and management of the Sprints that is important.I will start with a description of how product development is split into different time periods and then focus on the Sprint Planning ceremony.Product Development TimeboxesFigure 1 represents how an Agile product development is split into different timebox levels:The ‘complete’ product development is a timebox; it has a fixed end date; there may be maintenance periods after the product development is ‘complete’.The features of the product ‘go-live’ in a series of Release timeboxes, the content of each release contributing to the business benefits expected; usually, between 2 and 3 months.The content of each Release is developed in a series of Sprints, more of which below.The production of the artifacts produced in each Sprint may be timeboxed as well if appropriate.There are other ‘models’ that are used; some teams release at the end of each Sprint; Google is set to release new or modified functionality about every minute!Suffice to note here:The ‘High-Level Requirements Analysis’ in the Product Development line represents the activities that I covered in the first articles of this series.The Release timeboxes need to be decided before the development work starts.  It is useful if all Release timeboxes are of the same length but in practice, the first is usually longer than the rest and the last, shorter than rest; it depends on the product and organisation.What is a Sprint?For those who have heard the term ‘Sprint’ but not quite sure what it means, a Sprint is a fixed period of time in which ‘requirements’ are developed from the name to a fully working part of the final product, all done by a fixed size team (see ‘How not to be Agile 3. Product Backlog’ {Insert link to published article} for discussion about ‘The Iron Triangle’)’Having achieved an agreed, prioritised and estimated Product Backlog, the Development Team need to decide how long their Sprints will be; usually 2 to 3 weeks but can be as short a one week or as long as 4 weeks depending on the organisation’s circumstances and the nature of the product to be developed.  If it is thought necessary to have Sprint lengths greater than 4 weeks, then an in-depth analysis of the reasons for this must be made and changes, probably to the organisation, must be implemented so that the Sprint lengths can be reduced; more than 4 weeks between wider stakeholder reviews are too long and can lead to a lot of wasted work.It is worth noting here that once the Development Team has chosen their Sprint length, it remains the same for the whole product development unless something major happens which requires a change to release plans. Let’s see the purpose and steps for an effective Agile Sprint Planning.Sprint Planning DefinitionThere is a popular myth that Agile requires no planning; the ‘Nike’ approach –  ‘Just Do It’.Nothing is further than the truth; there are more planning ‘events’ in any Agile framework than any waterfall method that I have come across; we just plan at different levels.The first ‘ceremony’ of any Sprint is Sprint Planning  whereby the Development Team agree with the ‘Product Owner’ what the Sprint Goal is and which Product Backlog Items (PBI), that will contribute to that goal, will be attempted during the Sprint.Sprint Planning AttendeesIt is important that all of the Development Team, both full and part-time, the ‘Scrum Master’ and the ‘Product Owner’ attend the Sprint Planning as a minimum:The ‘Product Owner’ needs to be there to set the Sprint Goal, agree the PBI to be attempted in business order and agree on the Sprint MVP.The whole Development Team needs to be there because all team members have to agree on the Sprint Plan; if any team member is absent, he/she may feel that the work has been ‘foisted’ upon them and will have reduced motivation to do it.The ‘Scrum Master’ needs to be there to listen to the conversations so that they can keep a ‘fly on the wall’ view of the team during the Sprint and remind any team member that may be straying from the plan.Sprint GoalThis is a widely misunderstood part of Agile; there are many organisations that think that the Sprint Goal is to complete all the chosen PBI; it is not.A Sprint Goal helps the Development Team focus on a narrow aspect of the overall product, for example:“The Sprint Goal is to complete as many of the payment methods as possible”For a ‘retail’ website, there may be many possible payment methods such as credit/debit cards, PayPal, WorldPay etc.  There will no doubt be some ‘common’ aspects to all payment methods that will need to be developed and each method will have its own ‘specialised’ aspects; it is unlikely that all payment methods could be developed in oneSprint unless there was a great deal of reuse from other products.  Therefore, the customers’ most preferred payment methods may be in the Sprint’s MVP; others that cannot be completed in the Sprint go back into the Product Backlog in their respective business value order for consideration in later Sprints.You can think of a Sprint Goal as the Sprint Vision similar to the Product Development Vision that I discussed in the first article in this series. {Insert link to published article}Case Study 1:In one organisation that I coached in, when I arrived, they did not have ‘Sprint Goals’.  The teams worked out their capacity and ‘filled’ the Sprint with PBI estimated to fit that capacity.  The ‘Sprint Goal’ as far as management was concerned was to complete all the PBI in Sprint that was chosen during Sprint Planning.What you have in this situation is fixed time, fixed team and fixed requirements; recognise that? It’s a Waterfall.Because, like all of us, the team members were not that good at estimating, were reliant on external resources that it had no control over and did not know all the SprintBacklog Items (SBI) at Sprint Planning , the teams consistently ‘failed’ to complete all the Sprint Planning chosen PBI  in the Sprint.The immediate consequence of this was management ‘getting on the teams’ backs’ for not working hard enough.  Morale sank and the team members blamed Agile!The teams learned to ‘game’ the PBI estimating by increasing estimates so that less PBI were chosen at Sprint Planning.  One team even marked unfinished PBI as complete at the end of the Sprint and then ‘resurrected’ them for the next Sprint.Lessons:By not having a Sprint Goal, the ‘Product Owners’ lost the chance to focus Sprint development incoherent areasBy expecting Development Teams to complete all published SBI within the Sprint, team morale dropped, the team members blamed Agile and they focused on making themselves look better in the eyes of management rather than producing the best business value.Sprint Planning Inputs1) The Product Backlog:  The initial estimation of the next most important PBI to contribute to the Spring Goal was probably done sometime before Sprint Planning; the Development Team will have learned a lot from previous Sprints so those initial estimates may be way off.Most teams carry out Backlog Refinement during a Sprint to make sure that the next most important PBI are ready to be considered for the next Sprint; I will discuss Backlog Refinement in a later article.If Backlog Refinement is not done separately, it must be done as part of the Sprint Planning.2) Review Comments from the previous Sprint:  There may have been comments of the development to date from the previous Sprint Review session that may affect what needs to be done in the current Sprint.  These may include:High-priority changes required to previously developed PBI; unlikely but not unheard of.Changes to organisation strategy or tactics that mean necessary changes to Product Backlog ordering.Additional PBI that need to be added to the Product Backlog.3) ‘Inspect and Adapt’ Improvements:  The last ceremony of any Sprint is the Retrospective where the team discusses possible improvements to the process they are following and make prioritised plans to implement the improvements.The process improvement items must be considered when the team decides on what is possible in the Sprint; new processes sometimes slow production until they ‘bed-in’.4) The Risk List/Register: One Sprint Planning input that is mostly overlooked is the Development Risk List/Register.  Without going into the detail of Risk Analysis, one of its aspects is to determine when a particular risk may become an issueProbable risks need to be considered during Sprint Planning because any mitigation work that needs to be done will reduce the number of PBI that may be attempted.Sprint Planning Process1) Establish Probable Sprint2) Velocity Sprint Planning starts with the team deciding what their Sprint Velocity is expected to be from the following:Team Sprint Capacity: For most Agile teams, their Sprint capacity is based on the team’s Velocity; the average number of Story Points completed over the last 3 or 4 Sprints.  For organisations ‘wedded’ to time estimation, the team’s Sprint capacity is the number of team members multiplied by the number of working hours in the day multiplied by the number of working days in the Sprint.For teams using Velocity to estimate their capacity, any team member absence during the Sprint must be used to reduce the Velocity with which to plan the Sprint.Risk Analysis:  The Risk List/Register must be reviewed to see if any of the risks may become issues during the Sprint.  If so, then decisions must be made whether to:A) Implement any risk mitigation work in order to prevent the issue.B) Plan what to do if the risk does create an issue.C) ‘Ignore’ the risk if the probability of it causing an issue is low.Again, if the team consider that significant work must be done for managing any risks, then the team Velocity must be reduced to account for the risk management work.Review Comments:  The team must inspect the Review Comments from the previous Sprint Review to see if any remedial work is needed.  If so, the work must be estimated and, again, the team velocity must be reduced.Ideally, Review Comments that necessitate remedial work should become PBI and ordered by the Product Owner before Sprint Planning; if this is the case, there is no need to reduce the team’s Velocity.Inspect and Adapt:  If the team has decided that they will attempt process improvements during the Sprint, it needs to consider if any of these improvements will cause extra work and if so, what effect the extra work may have on the team Velocity.You may think that process improvements should result in a higher Velocity; however, if the process improvement is to do with getting better quality, then the Velocity may go down.Case Study 2:For one engagement, I was working as an analyst/designer and I raised a concern with the ‘Agile PM’ that I could not find the Risk List/Register so that I could add risks as they came up.  He was wary about adding risks because he believed that people would perceive that the more risks there were, the less he was capable of doing his job!After persuading him to let me see the Risk List, I found it to be wholly inadequate; the risks in the List were few, they weren’t ordered and there was no indication of impact severity, probability of becoming issues or when they may occur; there was no mitigation in place for any of them.I persuaded the ‘Product Owner’ that we should have a Risk Workshop with the Development Team and stakeholders.  At the end of the half-day workshop, we had a pretty good Risk List.BUT – the ‘Agile PM’ insisted that he, as the Risk and Issue Manager, would have sole control of it; he would not let anyone see it except himself!As time went on, not being able to see the Risk List, we in the Development Team could not take potential risks into our planning and when risks did turn into issues, we couldn’t see the agreed mitigation.  Progress slowed.LessonsAlways take time before development starts to get a good Risk List/Register not just including the ‘normal’ risks but also including the risks of being Agile in an organisation just beginning to transform.By all means, have the Agile PM/’Scrum Master’ being the sole ‘controller’ of the Risk List; all new risks and changes to existing risks must be passed through the Agile PM/’Scrum Master’ just like the ‘Product Owner’ controls the Product Backlog.The Risk List/Register must be available to the Development Team at Sprint Planning to adequately estimate its Sprint Velocity.2) Establish the Sprint GoalSee above.3) Choose Probable Sprint PBIThe Product Owner should initially choose the next most important PBI that will satisfy the Sprint Goal.The Development Team compare the revised Sprint Velocity with the total Story Points for the initial chosen PBI.The Development Team negotiate with the Product Owner to get the agreed SBI and the Sprint MVP; I discussed the MVP for the Product Backlog in my previous article, ‘How Not to Be Agile 3. Sprint Backlog’; the process to determine the Sprint MVP is the same as for the Product Backlog MVP.Create and publish the Sprint Plan.The team members decide who will do what and when and create the Team/Sprint Board (kanban).4) How Long Should Sprint Planning Take?There is no definitive answer to this question; it depends on the team, the product and the environment.  However, empirical observation of ‘successful’ teams indicates that for a 2-week Sprint, Sprint Planning should take between 2 and 4 hours.Case Study 3:The worst example of ‘non-Agile’ Sprint Planning that I have come across is with the same organisation that I spoke about in Case Study 1 aboveThe Product Backlog was filled in a ‘first come, first served’ order unless a ‘show-stopper’ turned up.There was no Risk Register.There was no Sprint Review Comments because there was no business representation at the Sprint Reviews.There was no ‘Inspect and Adapt’ plans because the teams didn’t really know what Retrospectives were supposed to be for; they held them because they were told to but they used it as a ‘team meeting’ chat.Each team’s Sprint Planning process consisted of:Looking at the next PBI and breaking them down into tasksEstimating the tasks in timeSelecting the PBI whose total estimated time added up to the team’s Sprint time capacity; senior management had ‘allowed’ a ‘contingency’ in that the Sprint time capacity was 80% of the total team time capacity.However, the team member’s task estimation was not done with any enthusiasm because they knew that ‘requirements’ would be arriving in the Sprint that represented between approximately 10% and 50% of the their capacity; there was no pattern to this extra work that could be used to modify the team’s Sprint capacity.What was worse was that senior management measured teams by the number of Sprint Backlog Items (SBI) that had been published in the Sprint Plan; the published list was never completed because of the ‘break-ins’.Each team was taking between 6 and 8 hours to complete Sprint Planning; producing a Sprint Plan that they knew would not work!I asked the teams if they thought their Sprint Planning was ‘reasonable’.  The answer worried me greatly.  The culture of the organisation was ‘what the management wants, the management gets’ and the teams had been used to criticism for years.  The Agile transformation, instigated by the senior management, was an attempt to change this situation but all of the management had probably had less training than the teams.Lessons:When finding ‘bad’ practices in teams, find out the root cause of the ‘bad’ practicesIf, as a ‘Product Owner’, ‘Scrum Master’ or Agile Coach, you do not have access to senior management, introduce a ‘disruptive experiment’; devise an effective Sprint Planning process for one team and when the management ask why things are so different, you will get the access to the management that you need to explain why their ‘edicts’ were probably less than optimal and possibly misinterpreted by the teams.Sprint Planning Output – The Sprint PlanThe Sprint Plan shows:A list of ordered PBI that will be attempted during the Sprint (the SBI) along with the Sprint MVP.A list of workshops that need to involve people outside of the Development Team with the people needed; the list includes dates, times and places for the workshops.A reminder of the Sprint Review date, time and place.The Sprint Plan is published to ALL stakeholders including those who will be required to help during the Sprint.What the Sprint Plan is NotThe Sprint Plan is not:A detailed, day-by-day Gantt Chart of tasks:  What the team does in the way of tasks is for the team onlyThe Team Board – Whether it is ‘Sticky Notes’ on the wall or an electronic representation of that, the Team Board is updated at least daily;  unless something major happens, the Sprint Plan is not changed after publication.Case Study 3:Unfortunately, there is one Agile ‘standards’ organisation that occasionally has a question in its certification exams:Q.  “How often can the Sprint Plan be amended?”A.  “Every day”Rationale.  “The Team Board is updated at least every day during the Daily Stand-up”I guess the organisation has the right to equate a Sprint Plan with the Team/Sprint Board but this has the effect that management and stakeholders need to look at the Board to see what the ‘current’ plan is; they cannot help but interpret the Board with some aspect of Sprint progress and if they do not like what they see, there is a temptation to intervene with the team.Lessons:Progress within a Sprint should be solely the responsibility of the Development Team facilitated by the ‘Scrum Master’.Remember – the sole measure of Sprint success is that the SBI representing the MVP have been completed.ConclusionEffectively preparing for Sprint Planning, following the best practices of Sprint Planning is essential for Sprint success:The ‘Product Owner’ must set the Sprint Goal.All factors influencing the expected team Sprint Velocity must be considered.Initial estimates of PBI done when creating the Product Backlog must be verified in the light of experience gained so far.The Development Team must agree with the ‘Product Owner’ which PBI to take into the Sprint Plan and agree on the Sprint MVP.The Sprint Plan is for the management and stakeholders.The Team/Sprint Board is for the Development Team.

How Not to be Agile – Ultimate Guide to Sprint Planning

609
  • by Steve Ash
  • 08th Oct, 2018
  • Last updated on 11th Mar, 2021
  • 4 mins read
How Not to be Agile – Ultimate Guide to Sprint Planning

Introduction

Hello and welcome to this, the fourth article in the series ‘How Not to be Agile’

‘How Not to be Agile’ may seem a strange title for blogs about how good Agile is!  What I intend to do over this series of articles is to share with you the misinterpretations, omissions, and mistakes that people make that significantly reduce the potential benefits when an organisation, or part of it, embark on an Agile Transformation.

Last time, I discussed the potential pitfalls with respect to the Product Backlog; this time, I will cover some of the misunderstandings and malpractices that I have come across to do with the ‘development timebox’ planning.  The most often used term for the ‘development timebox’ is the Sprint from Scrum; I will use this and other Scrum terminologies in this article but you can use whatever names you like; I shall put single quotes around Scrum role names to indicate that other names may be used.

It is the planning, content and management of the Sprints that is important.

I will start with a description of how product development is split into different time periods and then focus on the Sprint Planning ceremony.

Product Development Timeboxes
Product Development, Releases and Sprints

Figure 1 represents how an Agile product development is split into different timebox levels:

  • The ‘complete’ product development is a timebox; it has a fixed end date; there may be maintenance periods after the product development is ‘complete’.
  • The features of the product ‘go-live’ in a series of Release timeboxes, the content of each release contributing to the business benefits expected; usually, between 2 and 3 months.
  • The content of each Release is developed in a series of Sprints, more of which below.
  • The production of the artifacts produced in each Sprint may be timeboxed as well if appropriate.

There are other ‘models’ that are used; some teams release at the end of each Sprint; Google is set to release new or modified functionality about every minute!

Suffice to note here:

  • The ‘High-Level Requirements Analysis’ in the Product Development line represents the activities that I covered in the first articles of this series.
  • The Release timeboxes need to be decided before the development work starts.  It is useful if all Release timeboxes are of the same length but in practice, the first is usually longer than the rest and the last, shorter than rest; it depends on the product and organisation.

What is a Sprint?

For those who have heard the term ‘Sprint’ but not quite sure what it means, a Sprint is a fixed period of time in which ‘requirements’ are developed from the name to a fully working part of the final product, all done by a fixed size team (see ‘How not to be Agile 3. Product Backlog’ {Insert link to published article} for discussion about ‘The Iron Triangle’)’

Having achieved an agreed, prioritised and estimated Product Backlog, the Development Team need to decide how long their Sprints will be; usually 2 to 3 weeks but can be as short a one week or as long as 4 weeks depending on the organisation’s circumstances and the nature of the product to be developed.  If it is thought necessary to have Sprint lengths greater than 4 weeks, then an in-depth analysis of the reasons for this must be made and changes, probably to the organisation, must be implemented so that the Sprint lengths can be reduced; more than 4 weeks between wider stakeholder reviews are too long and can lead to a lot of wasted work.

It is worth noting here that once the Development Team has chosen their Sprint length, it remains the same for the whole product development unless something major happens which requires a change to release plans. Let’s see the purpose and steps for an effective Agile Sprint Planning.

Sprint Planning Definition

There is a popular myth that Agile requires no planning; the ‘Nike’ approach –  ‘Just Do It’.

Nothing is further than the truth; there are more planning ‘events’ in any Agile framework than any waterfall method that I have come across; we just plan at different levels.

The first ‘ceremony’ of any Sprint is Sprint Planning  whereby the Development Team agree with the ‘Product Owner’ what the Sprint Goal is and which Product Backlog Items (PBI), that will contribute to that goal, will be attempted during the Sprint.

Sprint Planning Attendees

It is important that all of the Development Team, both full and part-time, the ‘Scrum Master’ and the ‘Product Owner’ attend the Sprint Planning as a minimum:

The ‘Product Owner’ needs to be there to set the Sprint Goal, agree the PBI to be attempted in business order and agree on the Sprint MVP.

The whole Development Team needs to be there because all team members have to agree on the Sprint Plan; if any team member is absent, he/she may feel that the work has been ‘foisted’ upon them and will have reduced motivation to do it.

The ‘Scrum Master’ needs to be there to listen to the conversations so that they can keep a ‘fly on the wall’ view of the team during the Sprint and remind any team member that may be straying from the plan.

Sprint Goal

This is a widely misunderstood part of Agile; there are many organisations that think that the Sprint Goal is to complete all the chosen PBI; it is not.

A Sprint Goal helps the Development Team focus on a narrow aspect of the overall product, for example:

“The Sprint Goal is to complete as many of the payment methods as possible”

For a ‘retail’ website, there may be many possible payment methods such as credit/debit cards, PayPal, WorldPay etc.  There will no doubt be some ‘common’ aspects to all payment methods that will need to be developed and each method will have its own ‘specialised’ aspects; it is unlikely that all payment methods could be developed in one
Sprint unless there was a great deal of reuse from other products.  

Therefore, the customers’ most preferred payment methods may be in the Sprint’s MVP; others that cannot be completed in the Sprint go back into the Product Backlog in their respective business value order for consideration in later Sprints.

You can think of a Sprint Goal as the Sprint Vision similar to the Product Development Vision that I discussed in the first article in this series. {Insert link to published article}

Case Study 1:

In one organisation that I coached in, when I arrived, they did not have ‘Sprint Goals’.  The teams worked out their capacity and ‘filled’ the Sprint with PBI estimated to fit that capacity.  The ‘Sprint Goal’ as far as management was concerned was to complete all the PBI in Sprint that was chosen during Sprint Planning.

What you have in this situation is fixed time, fixed team and fixed requirements; recognise that? It’s a Waterfall.

Because, like all of us, the team members were not that good at estimating, were reliant on external resources that it had no control over and did not know all the Sprint

Backlog Items (SBI) at Sprint Planning , the teams consistently ‘failed’ to complete all the Sprint Planning chosen PBI  in the Sprint.

The immediate consequence of this was management ‘getting on the teams’ backs’ for not working hard enough.  Morale sank and the team members blamed Agile!

The teams learned to ‘game’ the PBI estimating by increasing estimates so that less PBI were chosen at Sprint Planning.  One team even marked unfinished PBI as complete at the end of the Sprint and then ‘resurrected’ them for the next Sprint.

Lessons:

  1. By not having a Sprint Goal, the ‘Product Owners’ lost the chance to focus Sprint development incoherent areas
  2. By expecting Development Teams to complete all published SBI within the Sprint, team morale dropped, the team members blamed Agile and they focused on making themselves look better in the eyes of management rather than producing the best business value.

Sprint Planning Inputs

1) The Product Backlog:  The initial estimation of the next most important PBI to contribute to the Spring Goal was probably done sometime before Sprint Planning; the Development Team will have learned a lot from previous Sprints so those initial estimates may be way off.

Most teams carry out Backlog Refinement during a Sprint to make sure that the next most important PBI are ready to be considered for the next Sprint; I will discuss Backlog Refinement in a later article.

If Backlog Refinement is not done separately, it must be done as part of the Sprint Planning.

2) Review Comments from the previous Sprint:  There may have been comments of the development to date from the previous Sprint Review session that may affect what needs to be done in the current Sprint.  These may include:

  • High-priority changes required to previously developed PBI; unlikely but not unheard of.
  • Changes to organisation strategy or tactics that mean necessary changes to Product Backlog ordering.
  • Additional PBI that need to be added to the Product Backlog.

3) ‘Inspect and Adapt’ Improvements:  The last ceremony of any Sprint is the Retrospective where the team discusses possible improvements to the process they are following and make prioritised plans to implement the improvements.

The process improvement items must be considered when the team decides on what is possible in the Sprint; new processes sometimes slow production until they ‘bed-in’.

4) The Risk List/Register: One Sprint Planning input that is mostly overlooked is the Development Risk List/Register.  Without going into the detail of Risk Analysis, one of its aspects is to determine when a particular risk may become an issue

Probable risks need to be considered during Sprint Planning because any mitigation work that needs to be done will reduce the number of PBI that may be attempted.

Sprint Planning Process

1) Establish Probable Sprint

2) Velocity Sprint Planning starts with the team deciding what their Sprint Velocity is expected to be from the following:

  • Team Sprint Capacity: For most Agile teams, their Sprint capacity is based on the team’s Velocity; the average number of Story Points completed over the last 3 or 4 Sprints.  

    For organisations ‘wedded’ to time estimation, the team’s Sprint capacity is the number of team members multiplied by the number of working hours in the day multiplied by the number of working days in the Sprint.

    For teams using Velocity to estimate their capacity, any team member absence during the Sprint must be used to reduce the Velocity with which to plan the Sprint.

  • Risk Analysis:  The Risk List/Register must be reviewed to see if any of the risks may become issues during the Sprint.  If so, then decisions must be made whether to:

    A) Implement any risk mitigation work in order to prevent the issue.
    B) Plan what to do if the risk does create an issue.
    C) ‘Ignore’ the risk if the probability of it causing an issue is low.

Again, if the team consider that significant work must be done for managing any risks, then the team Velocity must be reduced to account for the risk management work.

  1. Review Comments:  The team must inspect the Review Comments from the previous Sprint Review to see if any remedial work is needed.  If so, the work must be estimated and, again, the team velocity must be reduced.
    Ideally, Review Comments that necessitate remedial work should become PBI and ordered by the Product Owner before Sprint Planning; if this is the case, there is no need to reduce the team’s Velocity.
  2. Inspect and Adapt:  If the team has decided that they will attempt process improvements during the Sprint, it needs to consider if any of these improvements will cause extra work and if so, what effect the extra work may have on the team Velocity.
    You may think that process improvements should result in a higher Velocity; however, if the process improvement is to do with getting better quality, then the Velocity may go down.

Case Study 2:

For one engagement, I was working as an analyst/designer and I raised a concern with the ‘Agile PM’ that I could not find the Risk List/Register so that I could add risks as they came up.  He was wary about adding risks because he believed that people would perceive that the more risks there were, the less he was capable of doing his job!

After persuading him to let me see the Risk List, I found it to be wholly inadequate; the risks in the List were few, they weren’t ordered and there was no indication of impact severity, probability of becoming issues or when they may occur; there was no mitigation in place for any of them.

I persuaded the ‘Product Owner’ that we should have a Risk Workshop with the Development Team and stakeholders.  At the end of the half-day workshop, we had a pretty good Risk List.

BUT – the ‘Agile PM’ insisted that he, as the Risk and Issue Manager, would have sole control of it; he would not let anyone see it except himself!

As time went on, not being able to see the Risk List, we in the Development Team could not take potential risks into our planning and when risks did turn into issues, we couldn’t see the agreed mitigation.  Progress slowed.

Lessons

  • Always take time before development starts to get a good Risk List/Register not just including the ‘normal’ risks but also including the risks of being Agile in an organisation just beginning to transform.
  • By all means, have the Agile PM/’Scrum Master’ being the sole ‘controller’ of the Risk List; all new risks and changes to existing risks must be passed through the Agile PM/’Scrum Master’ just like the ‘Product Owner’ controls the Product Backlog.
  • The Risk List/Register must be available to the Development Team at Sprint Planning to adequately estimate its Sprint Velocity.

2) Establish the Sprint Goal

See above.

3) Choose Probable Sprint PBI

  • The Product Owner should initially choose the next most important PBI that will satisfy the Sprint Goal.
  • The Development Team compare the revised Sprint Velocity with the total Story Points for the initial chosen PBI.
  • The Development Team negotiate with the Product Owner to get the agreed SBI and the Sprint MVP; I discussed the MVP for the Product Backlog in my previous article, ‘How Not to Be Agile 3. Sprint Backlog’; the process to determine the Sprint MVP is the same as for the Product Backlog MVP.
  • Create and publish the Sprint Plan.
  • The team members decide who will do what and when and create the Team/Sprint Board (kanban).


4) How Long Should Sprint Planning Take?

There is no definitive answer to this question; it depends on the team, the product and the environment.  However, empirical observation of ‘successful’ teams indicates that for a 2-week Sprint, Sprint Planning should take between 2 and 4 hours.

Case Study 3:
The worst example of ‘non-Agile’ Sprint Planning that I have come across is with the same organisation that I spoke about in Case Study 1 above

  • The Product Backlog was filled in a ‘first come, first served’ order unless a ‘show-stopper’ turned up.
  • There was no Risk Register.
  • There was no Sprint Review Comments because there was no business representation at the Sprint Reviews.
  • There was no ‘Inspect and Adapt’ plans because the teams didn’t really know what Retrospectives were supposed to be for; they held them because they were told to but they used it as a ‘team meeting’ chat.

Each team’s Sprint Planning process consisted of:

  • Looking at the next PBI and breaking them down into tasks
  • Estimating the tasks in time
  • Selecting the PBI whose total estimated time added up to the team’s Sprint time capacity; senior management had ‘allowed’ a ‘contingency’ in that the Sprint time capacity was 80% of the total team time capacity.

However, the team member’s task estimation was not done with any enthusiasm because they knew that ‘requirements’ would be arriving in the Sprint that represented between approximately 10% and 50% of the their capacity; there was no pattern to this extra work that could be used to modify the team’s Sprint capacity.

What was worse was that senior management measured teams by the number of Sprint Backlog Items (SBI) that had been published in the Sprint Plan; the published list was never completed because of the ‘break-ins’.

Each team was taking between 6 and 8 hours to complete Sprint Planning; producing a Sprint Plan that they knew would not work!

I asked the teams if they thought their Sprint Planning was ‘reasonable’.  The answer worried me greatly.  The culture of the organisation was ‘what the management wants, the management gets’ and the teams had been used to criticism for years.  The Agile transformation, instigated by the senior management, was an attempt to change this situation but all of the management had probably had less training than the teams.

Lessons:

  1. When finding ‘bad’ practices in teams, find out the root cause of the ‘bad’ practices
  2. If, as a ‘Product Owner’, ‘Scrum Master’ or Agile Coach, you do not have access to senior management, introduce a ‘disruptive experiment’; devise an effective Sprint Planning process for one team and when the management ask why things are so different, you will get the access to the management that you need to explain why their ‘edicts’ were probably less than optimal and possibly misinterpreted by the teams.

Sprint Planning Output – The Sprint Plan
The Sprint Plan shows:

  • A list of ordered PBI that will be attempted during the Sprint (the SBI) along with the Sprint MVP.
  • A list of workshops that need to involve people outside of the Development Team with the people needed; the list includes dates, times and places for the workshops.
  • A reminder of the Sprint Review date, time and place.

The Sprint Plan is published to ALL stakeholders including those who will be required to help during the Sprint.

What the Sprint Plan is Not

The Sprint Plan is not:

  • A detailed, day-by-day Gantt Chart of tasks:  What the team does in the way of tasks is for the team only
  • The Team Board – Whether it is ‘Sticky Notes’ on the wall or an electronic representation of that, the Team Board is updated at least daily;  unless something major happens, the Sprint Plan is not changed after publication.

Case Study 3:

Unfortunately, there is one Agile ‘standards’ organisation that occasionally has a question in its certification exams:

Q.  “How often can the Sprint Plan be amended?”
A.  “Every day”

Rationale.  “The Team Board is updated at least every day during the Daily Stand-up”

I guess the organisation has the right to equate a Sprint Plan with the Team/Sprint Board but this has the effect that management and stakeholders need to look at the Board to see what the ‘current’ plan is; they cannot help but interpret the Board with some aspect of Sprint progress and if they do not like what they see, there is a temptation to intervene with the team.

Lessons:

  1. Progress within a Sprint should be solely the responsibility of the Development Team facilitated by the ‘Scrum Master’.
  2. Remember – the sole measure of Sprint success is that the SBI representing the MVP have been completed.

Conclusion
Effectively preparing for Sprint Planning, following the best practices of Sprint Planning is essential for Sprint success:

  • The ‘Product Owner’ must set the Sprint Goal.
  • All factors influencing the expected team Sprint Velocity must be considered.
  • Initial estimates of PBI done when creating the Product Backlog must be verified in the light of experience gained so far.
  • The Development Team must agree with the ‘Product Owner’ which PBI to take into the Sprint Plan and agree on the Sprint MVP.
  • The Sprint Plan is for the management and stakeholders.
  • The Team/Sprint Board is for the Development Team.
Steve

Steve Ash

Blog Author

Steve Ash has been working with ‘Agile’ since 1993 when it was known as ‘Managed RAD’.  He was an early adopter of the DSDM Framework in 1995 becoming a DSDM Board Member in 2002 and was a DSDM examiner.  He is a DSDM Advanced Practitioner and Accredited Trainer/Coach. Steve has since embraced Scrum, Kanban, the techniques advocated by XP, Lean Software Development and Lean Startup. He joined the Agile Alliance in 2002 and is a Certified Scrum Master (CSM), Certified Scrum Product Owner (CSPO), SAFe® Certified Consultant (SPC4) and certified by APMG International to teach Agile Project Management and Agile Business Analysis courses. Since 1996, Steve has trained, mentored and coached hundreds of people in many public and commercial organisations in 11 countries from the USA, through Europe and India to Asia/PAC.
 

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1 comments

Donald Hope 16 Nov 2018

Very circumstantial info Thanks.

Suggested Blogs

ITIL vs Agile: Make Right Choice for Your DevOps Career

Speed, agility and efficient use of technology has always been a challenge across organizations with complex IT environments. There is an unarguable need to go digital, and to do that, enterprises find that they must scale up and align the scope of their IT services—while at the same time managing to stay on top of the evolving business landscape. Agility and IT go hand in hand. Business agility cannot be achieved without innovative and agile infrastructural support, and organizations must put in considerable effort to upgrade their IT services and boost their tech capabilities. DevOps practices have been proven to alleviate the challenges associated with making IT work to realize business objectives. By integrating processes, people and tech to generate continuous value, DevOps has succeeded in increasing capabilities of delivering high-quality products and services quickly. The  DevOps global market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 18.6 % to reach USD 12.85 billion in the next 5 years (Grand View Research) and DevOps engineers are much in demand across industries and sectors. If you’re seeking a career in DevOps, which certification should you undertake: ITIL® Vs Agile? Let’s find out. What Is ITIL?Source Link: axelos.comTIL (an acronym for Information Technology Infrastructure Library) is a framework that codifies the best practices, processes and mindsets required for a software organization to deliver value through IT services. It deals with an end-to-end operating model that encompasses the creation, delivery, and continual improvement of IT services and products. ITIL has gone through many successive revisions, and the most recently updated version is ITIL 4. ITIL 4 is based on seven guiding principles that include:  Focus on value Start where you are Progress iteratively with feedback Collaborate and promote visibility Think and work holistically Keep it simple and practical Optimize and automate These principles guide all ITSM decisions and actions, and are the basis behind ITIL’s suggested best practices. ITIL 4 incorporates new practices that have been adopted in the decade since the last version refresh; such as Agile, DevOps and Lean IT.What Is Agile?Source Link: invensislearning.comA methodology that is fast growing in popularity, Agile is an iterative approach to project management and software development that helps teams to succeed in the face of volatile markets, delivering quality products and services to their customers. The work is carried out in small iterations, and requirements and plans are inspected and evaluated at the end of each cycle so that changes can be factored in as and when needed. Agile is built upon twelve foundational principles that were first outlined in the Agile Manifesto. These principles encapsulate the thinking behind Agile. They are: The highest priority of Agile teams is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. The customer is at the centre of all processes. Agile teams welcome changing requirements, even if they come in very late in the development journey. Agile processes harness change and can adapt in order to deliver competitive advantage. There is frequent delivery of working software, through iterations that range from a couple of weeks to a couple of months. The shorter timescale is always preferred. Agile emphasizes collaboration, and businesspeople and developers must work together daily throughout the project. Projects are built around motivated individuals, who are empowered with the environment and support they need and are trusted to get the job done. Face-to-face conversation is the most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team. Progress must be measured and communicated, and working software is the primary measure of progress. Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a consistent pace through the project. Agility enables continuous improvement, with a focus on technical excellence and good design. Agile teams have simplicity at their core. Simplicity is defined as the art of maximizing the amount of work not done and prompts just-in-time development. Teams are self-managed and cross functional. The Manifesto states that ‘the best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. The team sits together at regular intervals to inspect the work done and reflect on how to become more effective. They then recalibrate and adjust their behaviour accordingly. There are many methodologies that come under the Agile umbrella, such as Scrum, Kanban, XP and DSDM. All these methods follow the Agile values: Individuals and interactions (are preferred) over processes and tools  Working software (is preferred) over comprehensive development  Customer collaboration (is preferred) over negotiations  Responding to change frequently (is preferred) to following a plan ITIL Vs Agile – the Key Differences In the DevOps world, the choice between ITIL and Agile has become a topic that is hotly debated. Both methodologies are quite different, even though they have the same end goal: that of creating and delivering value, while optimizing resources.  As ITIL has now transitioned from Version 3 to ITIL 4, it has kept a pace with the speed of today’s businesses. There is, therefore, a visible shift from rigid processes to more flexible, seamless experiences. ITIL 4 has embodied the principles of Agile and offers a more holistic frame of reference to ITSM. The key differences between ITIL and Agile are laid out in the table below:ITILAgileFocuses on processes and practicesAgile is a group of practices based on core values and principlesITIL follows predefined traditionsAgile is innovativeITIL 4 is in sync with Agile practicesAgile embraces and responds to changeITIL does not seek feedback from end usersAgile teams believe in continual feedback, and improve their processes and the product after each iterationITIL requires comprehensive documentationAgile believes in minimal documentation, only when needed and just enoughITIL lays more emphasis on processes than on the customer, and believes that customer value is created by following the right methodology to fulfil SLAs (service level agreements)Agile is customer-focusedITIL creates a stable and sustainable IT environmentAgile has a flexible environment that supports changeHead-to-Head Comparison Between ITIL and AgileITIL and Agile are both essential to the creation of business value. However, while Agile looks at improving the delivery of products or services, ITIL is focused on streamlining processes and practices. Both are complementary components of DevOps, which works to seamlessly integrate the interaction and flow between the two IT functions of development and operations. By blending together the key points of both frameworks, a successful DevOps culture can be built.Can You Integrate Agile and ITIL?As technologies keep evolving and organizations step up to stay ahead of these advancements, IT teams find themselves at the centre of transformations. Technologies like cloud computing, AI and IoT have fuelled innovative ways of working, which require agility in order to embrace the transformative changes necessitated by the industry.  Both Agile and ITIL have always focused on building products or services that meet customer needs and deliver high quality. They believe in keeping processes simple, acting quickly and streamlining value delivery—together offering a blueprint that maximizes the creation of value. With the advent of ITIL 4, the ITIL framework had added Agility to the framework, in a transition that has proven to be a gamechanger. ITIL 4 embraces Agile and DevOps ways of working, and encourages a collaborative, iterative, and customer-centric approach to ITSM. ITIL 4 nudges teams toward a new frame of reference that is customer-centric and adapts more easily to what teams need, and how they work. The most radical change that ITIL 4 has brought about to enable this shift is the concept of the Service Value Chain (SVS), which represents the interlinked set of activities that must be undertaken to create highly valuable products and services that are closely aligned to customer expectations. Along the way, inefficiencies, redundancies and bottlenecks are eliminated, improving delivery speed and optimizing resource allocation. Value and value-based tools are given an overarching emphasis in ITIL 4, with Lean thinking driving co-creation of value. By seamlessly aligning Agile and ITIL to drive DevOps, organizations can pave the way to quality services with quick turnaround times. The Last Word Today’s businesses are in a state of constant change with advancements in technologies also happening at warp speed. This unpredictability needs to be reined in to create stability, while at the same time allowing for enough flexibility in order to adapt to the evolving changes. A combination of ITIL and Agile offers the best solution for business service management solutions. A DevOps approach that merges ITIL’s best practices with the smooth change management enabled by Agile, offers the perfect recipe for business success in an uncertain world. 
9884
ITIL vs Agile: Make Right Choice for Your DevOps C...

Speed, agility and efficient use of technology has... Read More

What Is an Agile Environment? Explained With Example

As more and more companies choose to go the Agile way, there is growing appreciation for the many transformational benefits that this innovative suite of methods can provide.Agile represents a radical deviation from traditional, siloed project management processes. It does away with legacy systems and processes, infusing flexibility and the willingness to embrace change. With a network of cross-functional teams working in tandem to deliver products and services that are closely aligned to the changing expectations from the market, Agile is guaranteed to deliver fast, optimize resources and maximize value. The first step in adopting an Agile operating model is to set the stage, laying a foundation where flexibility, innovation and adaptability can thrive—the Agile environment. How can your organization create a fluid environment that fosters the Agile mindset and easily aligns itself with change? Let’s find out. Being AgileAt its core, Agility is much more than a set of principles and processes; and in order to reap the benefits of this methodology, it’s very important to get everyone on board with the Agile mindset. What this means, is that in order to do Agile, you must first be agile. What, exactly, does this mean? The dictionary defines Agility as ‘the ability to move quickly and easily’. And this is indeed the essence of what being Agile is all about.  Simply stated, Agility in project management is the ability to move quickly, easily and adapt to changing circumstances. When project requirements change, the team must analyse the change and course-correct as needed so that they can keep on top of customer needs.  In order to do all this, they must be on board with the Agile mindset. As Steve Denning, author of the book The Age of Agile, put it: “(Agile) is a shift in mindset from a top-down bureaucratic hierarchical approach to a very different way of thinking about and acting in organizations. If you have don’t have the Agile mindset you are going to get it wrong.” What this entails is a complete shift in the ways we think and the ways we do things. When the team blindly follows processes without understanding and internalising the core Agile values, the Agile transformation is unlikely to succeed. What Makes an Agile Environment? Agile follows four values, which inform and guide all the processes and practices in an Agile environment. These are: Individuals and interactions over Processes and tools Working software over Comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over Contract negotiation Responding to change over Following a plan As stated in the Manifesto, it's not that the items on the right are not valued! It's just that the items on the left are valued more, and that’s what brings about agility. An agile environment, therefore, is one that fosters and supports a culture that encourages teams to work collaboratively toward achieving goals, while implementing the Agile framework and following its values and principles.  Agile environments help teams to be nimble, accept change and adapt to evolving requirements, thus bringing in innovation and creativity in the development lifecycle. An Agile environment will ensure that Agile values are followed.Characteristics of Agile EnvironmentsFocus on customerAgile approaches have the customer squarely in focus at all times. Customer needs are emphasized and the team’s highest priority is to satisfy the customer through quick, early deliveries of incremental value. Stakeholder feedback is solicited at every stage and is incorporated into subsequent iterations. By keeping all those who matter in the loop, customer satisfaction is guaranteed.Embracing changeAgile is all about embracing change. Even late in the development cycle, if there is a change in requirements or features, the team should retract their steps and accommodate the change, rather than stick to a rigid, predefined plan. The team is required to be nimble, adapt and pivot to embrace new, evolving circumstances.Leaving room for innovation Agile does not apply a cookie cutter method to project management; rather, it allows room for flexibility and innovation. Agile teams work in close collaboration, brainstorming to find solutions and working as a team to come up with innovative ideas. Agile fuels new ways of thinking, and comes up with brilliant, ingenuous products and services that are a cut above the competition. Focus on process improvement Agile methods are a natural choice for projects where high quality is a key focus. Agile techniques help teams to improve their processes in a continual cycle, where they inspect, reflect and adapt themselves at the end of each iteration. Process improvement events such as Reviews and Retrospectives are built into each cycle, and teams enhance and deliver value at every stage. Working in iterations The iterative approach taken by Agile focuses on delivering incremental value in stages, rather than all at once in the end as was the case with traditional processes. Each iteration is timeboxed, typically with 2-week cycles, and there is a release of value at the end of each cycle. The product is therefore successively refined and its quality is continually enhanced. Collaboration Agile teams all work together collaboratively toward a shared common goal. They do this through shared responsibilities and accountability to deliver products of value and high quality, as a team. Right from defining tasks and estimating effort to developing, testing and releasing, the team is closely aligned with each other in meeting the shared objectives.Examples of Agile EnvironmentsAn example of an organization that has successfully adopted the concept of an Agile environment is Google. Google’s Mountain View office houses workspaces that are fluid, with plenty of space for functional collaboration. With less space allocated to individuals and more space designed around collective teams, Google teams have a positive, exciting workspace that is fluid and dynamic and supports creating value together. Communal tables in open spaces encourage stand-up meetings, while project rooms on the periphery have tools for group workshops. Teams can use dedicated team rooms with writable wall surfaces and display areas where brainstorming sessions can take place. Facebook, LinkedIn, Airbnb, Salesforce and other forward-thinking organizations have also recognized the importance of providing their employees with creative, collaborative infrastructure and spaces that will help foster innovation and fuel productivity.How to Create an Agile Physical Environment An organization that wants to go agile can start by offering a conducive environment; one that equips its workforce with the right physical infrastructure and tools. They can do this in several ways:  By collocating the teamA collocated team that is able to hold face-to-face conversations is in the best position to collaborate well. When teams are in the same physical space, trust is enhanced, communication is encouraged, and transparency is the result. A workspace should ideally have no hierarchy at all, with open-plan workstations that allow people to collaborate more easily. They can get clarifications at once instead of waiting for online responses, and can help each other when they find themselves in a tough spot. However, in today’s world collocation of teams is not always an option. Teams that are distributed across geographies and time zones can take advantage of online collaboration tools such as Teams, ProofHub, Trello, Asana and so on to stay on the same page and keep in touch on a real-time basis. Set up a dedicated physical space Teams that are in the same location will perform better when they have a dedicated team room where they can work together in close proximity. One wall can be set up with whiteboards and pin up boards for team collaboration, mapping of tasks and so on. The space can be set up to boost productivity; workstations around the edge of the room and a conference table in the middle will work well. Keep the team safe from distractions Any outside distractions, such as interference from management, consults on other projects, and so on will throw the team off track and greatly hinder progress. It is the Scrum Master’s responsibility to smoothen any and all such obstructions, and some of the ways in which this can be done are listed here: Avoid multitasking Work on one goal at a time Let the team figure out who works on what Block any outside distractors Distractions will drain the team’s focus and result in wasted time, energy and effort.  Equip the team with the right tools There is no dearth of productivity-enhancing tools that can help a team stay on track with respect to schedules, budget and resources. Some tools that will enhance the team’s productivity and boost progress are: Zepel Jira Github Wrike Trello Conclusion As hundreds of organizations have found to their delight, an Agile transformation results in real and lasting positive impact. When done right, Agile can empower organizations to outpace the competition, adapt to changing market scenarios, work on innovative solutions to everyday problems, and continuously maximize value.  
8784
What Is an Agile Environment? Explained With Examp...

As more and more companies choose to go the Agile ... Read More

Planning Poker: An Agile Estimating and Planning Technique

One thing that all Agile teams have in common is their capacity to have fun while they work.  are creative, flexible and think out of the box; and working on an Agile team is a far cry from working on a dreary, process-heavy waterfall project. By building in collaborative team activities and doing away with excessive documentation and rigid mandates, Agile team members are always on their toes and passionate about their work.  One of the innovative ways in which they work is by planning Poker, a consensus-based game that helps to arrive at estimates and work out timelines for releases. Let’s find out how to play Poker!  What Is Planning Poker? Definition and Process‘Planning Poker® is the secure, fun way for agile teams to guide sprint planning and build accurate consensus estimates.’ - planningpoker.com  There’s no doubting it; Agile estimation is very hard. A project in which the requirements are continually changing is definitely going to have volatility in terms of timeframes, budgets and schedules. How, then, can the team chalk out a roadmap and figure out milestones and releases? Arguably the most popular way to estimating schedules on an Agile project, Planning Poker is a technique that allows each team member to weigh in on the planning process for each user story.  Here’s how the process plays out: The team uses a deck of Planning Poker cards which have values printed on one side, say  0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20, 40 and 100. These values represent the units in which the team will be carrying out the estimation, which could be (for example) story points or ideal days. The Product Owner describes a feature that needs to be developed. The team asks doubts, discusses the feature and gets the required clarity. Each estimator holds a set of Planning Poker cards and selects one card in private. The number on this card will indicate their estimate for the work on the feature. They place the card face down on the table. All the cards are revealed at the same time, so that no one is influenced by another person’s decision. If everyone has the same value, that is chosen as the estimate.  If not, outliers are discussed, and another round of estimation is carried out. This process is continued till the team arrives at a consensus for the estimate. The estimates for subsequent features are taken up one by one, in a similar manner. Common PitfallsThe process is not completely intuitive, and while it is simple it could take a newbie some time to get used to the concept. Teams that are new will, therefore, often fall short of the estimate or go too long. However, with experience they will be able to arrive at more accurate estimates. For a sprint with many features, this process could take longer than expected as each estimate might run into multiple rounds of consensus building. If there is one experienced member who is very dominating, he or she might lead the discussions and quell the opinions of others on the team (who might be saying the right thing but might not be heard). Again, this method does not always work well with distributed teams, as for the process to work well, they should ideally be in a face-to-face session. If the story is not fleshed out well, the estimate might not be accurate.Expected BenefitsThe most significant advantage of Planning Poker is that every team member’s voice is heard. This increases team morale and build the right rapport. The group gets into the rhythm of discussing and collaborating on the project, which will hold them in good stead for the rest of the journey. These discussions help to give clarity on the features to be built, and dispel any ambiguity around the user stories. This ‘game’ builds commitment and accountability. As each team member has contributed to the estimate, they will work toward achieving it wholeheartedly. Last but not least, Planning Poker is fun!  Agile Estimation – Relative Vs AbsolutMost of us are used to absolute estimates. Let’s take an example. If you’re asked, for instance, how long you would take to walk three rounds of a park, you’d probably say that you can walk one round at a brisk pace in 8 minutes. You are not going to tell them your answer in relative terms, for example, you would never tell them that you can walk one round in four fifths of the time it would take X to do the same! In Agile, however, we prefer to work with relative estimates, as this offers more flexibility. Story points are determinations of the effort needed to complete task A, relative to the effort needed to complete task B. As there is a lot of uncertainty around the requirements, and the team does not want to spend too much effort estimating on a task that might change very soon, story point estimation is the perfect way to arrive at a rough and ready calculation of the level of effort needed for a task. When Should We Engage in Planning Poker?Typically, a Planning Poker session will be held just after the initial product backlog is written. It could take up to a few days, and is useful in creating initial approximate estimates that will be used to determine the scope, and plan and size the entire project. In an Agile project, it is only to be expected that product backlog items get added as the project unfolds. It would therefore make sense for the team to hold subsequent agile estimating and planning sessions during every iteration. These sessions can be held a few days before the end of the iteration, or whenever the team feels it is most convenient. How Does Poker Planning Work with a Distributed Team?Planning Poker always works best with a team that can sit across a table and hold discussions. However, this is not always possible, especially when teams span geographies and work across different offices.  In such cases, Planning Poker can work over a conference call or a Skype session. A Product Owner could share a set of items that have to be estimated, and the estimators log in at a prescheduled time and pick and show their cards over the video call, in much the same way as they would in a face-to-face session. There is a moderator, usually the Product Owner, who leads the discussions and makes notes. Does Planning Poker Work?Yes, it certainly does, and teams that use this method report that they are able to arrive at more accurate estimates more consistently than when other methods are used. Averaging individual estimates will always lead to better results.The reason for this is that when team members are all allowed to weigh in on the planning process, everyone’s opinion is heard. This is not the case when estimation is carried out by a project manager who does not take the team’s opinions into account. Since it is the team members who are ultimately working on the project, they will have the best sense of the effort needed to finish each task.Tips for Planning Poker in ScrumPlaying Planning Poker for the first time? Here are some tips from the pros, to help you get your game going! While it is definitely a game, it’s a serious game and not to be taken lightly. Each member must carefully evaluate the feature and calculate the time they feel it would take to complete it in its entirety. If they have any doubts, they should get them clarified. The discussion that ensues will help the team to get going in the right direction during the development phase, as it clears the air and removes any ambiguity. Agile estimates are relative and should not be converted to work hours. This will negate the value of using flexible Agile story points. The estimate is team-level and not on an individual level, as the team drives the work. If your opinion differs from that of others, make sure that you speak up. Your understanding of the feature may be the right one. It’s also important to note that the team should never suppress the voice of each individual; rather they should hear what everyone has to say with patience and understanding. Keep the card sizes small. Most teams like to use numbers smaller than 13, as larger stories will not fit into one sprint. If the story is too large, it should be broken down into a manageable chunk of work. Even if someone on the team is new to Planning Poker, make sure that they are not excluded. The entire team must be engaged. Keep expectations realistic. Point value creep, which is a condition where the estimates of stories inexplicably become larger over time, leads to unrealistic expectations and too much pressure from stakeholders. This causes stress and burnout in the long run. In the End.... As with everything to do with Agile, Planning Poker is a process that sounds easy enough but might take time and experience to get right. Take our tips to heart and be wary of the potential pitfalls that we have listed out, and your team will be able to get the most benefit from this tool! 
9884
Planning Poker: An Agile Estimating and Planning T...

One thing that all Agile teams have in common is t... Read More

Useful links