Timeline for Point estimates scale skewed
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 22, 2014 at 16:36 | history | edited | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 1 character in body |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 11:08 | comment | added | MetaFight | yes there is something wrong with a logarithmic scale because it forces you to compromise your planning just to get things to almost work. | |
| Aug 15, 2014 at 3:30 | comment | added | Izkata | @svidgen We also ended up with a logarithmic scale, and balance it out by pulling in around the same number of cases of each point level in each sprint. This way the sprints stay comparable and velocity consistent despite the points not adding up linearly between cases. There's nothing wrong with a logarithmic scale as long as it's adjusted for in other ways. | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 21:28 | comment | added | Oleg | @svidgen: imho reporting activities go on top of the "foundation" of dev estimates - since I expect the PO to push back on adjusting the scale, I'd rather get backing for the issue with the dev team & scrum master first and then present it to the PO as "this is something we need for our dev processes to work, and by the way this will contribute to meaningful reporting" | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 21:09 | comment | added | svidgen | @o.v. I'm not sure what you mean. The PO needs to see the points for planning and promising purposes. But, he should have readonly privileges on those estimates! And its in his and the team's best interest to ensure that 8 is roughly 1 * 8. Else, how do you know what an average velocity of ... I dunno ... 32 means? Is that 32 1 point stories? Is it 4 8-point stories? Or is it only meaningful if you have a sprint of 16 1-pointers and 2 8-pointers? | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 21:02 | comment | added | Oleg | @svidgen: hmm, perhaps this would be a good subject for a "pre-retro". You're right, I don't think this is a subject the PO should even be exposed to. | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 20:55 | comment | added | svidgen | @o.v. The way what is? ... It sounds like you need start the "why are we doing SCRUM?" and/or "what are our story point estimates good for?" conversations. Your "product owner" doesn't seem to fully understand what the point of the disciplines are. ... I mean hell, why is the PO telling you why a story is scored the way it is!?? It's your job to tell him how big it is; his job is pretty exclusively one or prioritization. | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 20:51 | comment | added | Oleg | @svidgen: no. When this inconsistency (an eight-pointer... more than eight times as complex as a one-pointer) was flagged up in one of the retros, the product owner's reply was "well, that's the way it is" ;_; | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 20:28 | comment | added | svidgen | @o.v. You've explicitly agreed in the past that the scale should be non-linear? | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 20:23 | comment | added | Oleg | @svidgen: the problem with reviewing the estimates in a retro is that they actually fit our scale. It's just that the scale is non-linear - an eight-pointer above is much more than eight times as complex as a one-pointer. | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 16:31 | comment | added | MetaFight | I like your last sentence :) | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 16:25 | history | edited | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 107 characters in body |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 16:19 | history | answered | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |