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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Scheduling Defect Fixes

Expand Messages
  • Roy Morien
    I still can t see this, George. velocity is roughly the team s capacity to accomplish work within a Sprint ... yes, I agree. The bit I don t get is If
    Message 1 of 347 , Feb 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      I still can't see this, George.
       
      "velocity is roughly the team's capacity to accomplish work within a Sprint" ... yes, I agree.

      The bit I don't get is "If you've estimated the work to fix defects, you should /subtract/ that from the available capacity." ... Why? The time and effort in fixing the defects is part of the team's capacity to accomplish work. Fixing the defects is work. If you have no defects to fix (highly desirable, of course), then the team's total capacity to accomplish work will be spent on new development. BUT if they have defects to fix, then they cannot accomplish that same amount of new development, although they are working to capacity.
       
      What you say is correct only if the definition of velocity is "velocity is roughly the team's capacity to accomplish NEW work PREVIOUSLY NOT ATTEMPTED, THAT IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO USER REQUESTS FOR NEW FUNCTIONALITY, within a Sprint".  This is not, in my view, the definition, purpose and use of the concept of velocity.
       
      But this is, of course, where I obviously differ from some others.
       
      Regards,
      Roy Morien

      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      From: lists@...
      Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:46:03 -0500
      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scheduling Defect Fixes

       
      Charles,

      On 1/31/11 12:55 PM, Charles Bradley - Scrum Coach, CSM, PSM I wrote:
      > I'm curious though.
      > > If you wish to estimate how long they will take to fix, feel free
      > > to do so.
      > No mention of adding defect fixing to your velocity calculation? Even to
      > mention that the practice is controversial? Maybe you were going for a
      > "basic" or "high level" description of the solution.
      >
      > To the OP(the one who asked about scheduling bugs into Scrum), my
      > comment is this: Be careful about adding your defect fixing estimates to
      > velocity(which is a User Story concept). That practice is controversial,
      > and the main risk is that you do not want to decrease transparency by
      > lumping material amounts of "defect fixing efforts" in with "new
      > functionality efforts that add value to the system." The best solution,
      > as Ron mentions, is probably to reduce defects to such a small rate that
      > there is no material amount of defect fixing time. There are other
      > solutions, but they get down "into the weeds" in Scrum and User Story
      > philosophy.

      Yes. The way I express it is that velocity is roughly the team's
      capacity to accomplish work within a Sprint. If you've estimated the
      work to fix defects, you should /subtract/ that from the available
      capacity. And always remember that the goal is to produce working
      software, not to "get credit" for story points.

      - George

      --
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
      Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
      Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------


    • Vikrama Dhiman
      ... Although, this is not Twitter. I really want to do a+1. Echoes my thoughts completely. Won t have been able to put it better myself. Thanks Vikrama Dhiman
      Message 347 of 347 , Feb 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        >>It (and the length of this thread) is a great illustration of why I recommend that teams not get too wrapped up in estimation. They start looking for numerical precision, and that starts consuming the energy that could be put toward accomplish goals.

        Although, this is not Twitter. I really want to do a +1.

        Echoes my thoughts completely. Won't have been able to put it better myself.
         
        Thanks

        Vikrama Dhiman
        ================================================================
        Personal Blog : http://www.vikramadhiman.com/
        My Blog about all things Agile : http://agilediary.wordpress.com/



        From: George Dinwiddie <lists@...>
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wed, February 2, 2011 11:09:28 PM
        Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Scheduling Defect Fixes

         

        On 2/2/11 5:48 AM, Ron Jeffries wrote:
        > Hello, kbs_kulbhushan. On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, at
        > 12:23:59 AM, you wrote:
        >
        >> Does this make sense?
        >
        > Not really, but it was a delightful demonstration of how many
        > numbers can dance on the head of a pin.

        It (and the length of this thread) is a great illustration of why I
        recommend that teams not get too wrapped up in estimation. They start
        looking for numerical precision, and that starts consuming the energy
        that could be put toward accomplish goals.

        I suggest that the primary reason for estimating stories & tracking
        velocity is to help the team decide how much work they can do in the
        next iteration. I've found that developing clear acceptance examples
        (a.k.a. tests) helps them do that much better than more time spent
        honing estimates.

        I suggest that the secondary reason for estimating stories & tracking
        velocity is to help the PO predict how much functionality can be done by
        a certain date, or how long it will take to build a certain amount of
        functionality. When doing so, one has to remember that these are just
        estimates, no matter how much work you put into them. You need to allow
        some leeway for the things you don't know and can't predict. You need
        to track actual progress, and give that more weight than any predicted
        progress. And you need to measure actual progress in ways that don't
        mislead you. The more calculations you put in, the more likely you're
        going to fool yourself.

        - George

        P.S. Remember that the abbreviation for "estimation" is "guess."

        --
        ----------------------------------------------------------
        * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
        Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
        Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
        ----------------------------------------------------------


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