Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Burn Up Charts

Expand Messages
  • Mike Cohn
    Mary- This is interesting. I ve never encountered a group before, though, that had a problem with burning down and thinking of that as a negative. I assume the
    Message 1 of 64 , Apr 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment

      Mary—

      This is interesting.

      I’ve never encountered a group before, though, that had a problem with burning down and thinking of that as a negative. I assume the y-axis below is really “time spent” rather than features. One concern I would have expected developers to have with this chart would be the boss looking at it and seeing a high value on the y-axis: “You mean we’ve spent 20,000 person-hours on that project!!!!”  I think I’m going to experiment with “burn-up” charts for a couple of sprints and see how they go.

       

      Thanks for sharing the idea with this group.

       

      -Mike

       

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Mary Poppendieck [mailto:mary@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:56 AM
      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: siliconvalleypatterns@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Burn Up Charts

       

      Hello Scrum Users,

       

      I was at the Silicone Valley User’s Group meeting last week and after the meeting a discussion occurred around burn-down charts.  The group has a problem with the Scrum charts because they trend down rather than up (perceived by developers as negative), and more particularly, because they measure two things at once:  both the team’s velocity and the change in the backlog.  If the team has little control over the backlog, the thought is that they would prefer to see the two charted separately, and as a burn-UP chart.  Below is one possible example (hopefully you can see this chart):

       

       

      What do Scrum users think about this? 

       

      Mary Poppendieck

      www.poppendieck.com

      Author of

      Lean Software Development: An Agile Toolkit

       



      To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Dave Hoover
      Mike, ... Agreed! ... I think we struggle with researching previous art because most of the leading agile thinkers are in the trenches, not in academia.
      Message 64 of 64 , Apr 12, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Mike,

        > I think it is fine to assume that it is "independent
        > thinking". This is a good thing because it confirms
        > that at least 2 people can reach the same conclusions
        > and can validate their experiences and explain
        > the world the same way.

        Agreed!

        > (You could always
        > ask the question the other way: Is the stuff
        > from "Growing Software" coming from somewhere else
        > since our stuff was published 5-7 years ago
        > i.e. PLOP3 proceedings, PLOPD4 book, etc. I think
        > it is safe to assume "independent thinking" because
        > our industry is famous for not researching
        > "previous art". In hard Science this would actually
        > be an embarrassment.)

        I think we struggle with researching "previous art" because most of the
        leading agile thinkers are in the trenches, not in academia. This is why I was
        excited when I saw the overlap between the Scrum book and "Growing
        Software". I figured that both the Scrum folks and Roy had probably not had
        the opportunity to find each other.

        I look forward to the outcome of future collaborations between agile thinkers
        who find complexity science applicable to software development.

        --Dave
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.