A seven minute long video full of knowledge. There was no waste of words as everything you said was useful and needed information. You did a great job well done.
Thanks for the explanation. What size of user point story should be accomadate in a sprint? For eg., can we include 26 user point story in a sprint or does it needs further splitting into smaller user stories?
Well, that, of course, depends on the WIP capacity of your sprint: how many developers x how long the sprint is. For a more in-depth discussion of capacity, you may like to try a channel with a true Scrum expert, like Alexis Allen. I am not a Scrum practitioner.
hello, Thank you for the video. Please what we mean by lack of the Understanding of the Technical Nature behind the requirement? does that mean the technical solution is not feasible or at least not mature?
Mohamed, thank you. Understanding the technical nature of a problem or requirement means recognizing what technologies can work and being familiar enough with them to understand their strengths and limitations. The team needs to be able to assess where the challenges are likely to be, and what alternatives are available. If they are not able to fully understand the technical nature of the problem, they need to either: - take some time to do further research, or - co-opt onto the team an additional expert with the right knowledge and experience The risk of proceeding without a full understanding (with a lack of understanding) are: - believing something is possible when it is not - believing something is easier than it is - believing something is harder than it is - believing something is not possible, when it is
Thx for that explanation, it was very clear! I have a question about your final point though, you said that if you can't resolve the uncertainty you know something important. That there is a wide range of possible outcomes of a story and therefore the range of estimates is what you need to record. But how would that work during planning? I imagine if you have a story with a range of 5SP-20SP you wouldn't be able to plan this. Does that automatically mean stories with a range estimate need to be broken up further (even if it's a small range)?
If you know there is a wide range, it tells you you need to hear different points of view to understand the different assumptions and methods of reasoning that led to them. This way each team member can re-evaluate. If you cannot get consensus it suggests one or more of: - the user story is not clearly specified - the complexity is very high - the risk is high - the team's capabilities aren't well-matched to the challenge - the task is very new and will require innovation - and loads more too, I expect!
The team sets one particular user story as a set size. Then all other sizes are scaled from that. So, if the calibration is one story point is around one day of effort, then yes. But there is no universal scaling.
@@Onlinepmcourses Thank you for quick reply. Request you to let me in general with your experience how many our hours can be considered? As a size for 1
@@abcvlog1668 There's no fixed relationship. But, a sensible approach would be 1 story point ~ 1 day of effort. So, a big story at 8 points would be pretty much a whole 2-week (10 days) sprint. Longer than that and it would suggest breaking the story up.
Nice way to waste time (and money!) to guesstime for a granular list of fast track projects pending on being delivered The practicality Zero or None... The price paid definitely needs to not be ignored bc otherwise you will see yourself trapped in multiple meetings
For some agile projects, this is an appropriate level of estimation. I come from a predictive project management background where, like you, I expect more detailed time and budget estimates, which my clients would always require. But, there is room for other models, where clients and sponsors have different expectations. And Planning Poker is one approach to delivering good order of magnitude estimates. Sometimes, that will genuinely be the best you can achieve.
@@Onlinepmcourses I understand your point I appreciate the simple way you wrap the subject for the audience Now, in terms of the subject per se, it is a waste of money and time, You end up with people in meetings instead of working on the projects Let dev to define times and complexity, and then track the accuracy or reliability on their prediction In an agile environment, which is agile, bc you have tons of projects and need to deliver tangible outputs in between you cannot afford people's time wasted this way plus the cost of meetings which is never cheap
@@katiushkaflores Well, look... firstly, thank you for the nice things. Second, I respect your opinion, but there are a lot of teams that use Planning Poker and get value from it. And there are a lot of people who therefore want or need to know how it works. So, let's agree to let project and development teams make their own minds up as to whether the time spent on this process is valuable. Thirdly, my view is that it can be valuable for one very important reason. Two or more perspectives (up to a reasonable limit) gives more chance of homing in on the right answer. If one person does the estimating, then they may miss something or make a flawed assumption. If two other people collaborate, one of them may spot the mistake. This is why team working is such a central part of the agile mindset.
