Master the Art of Planning Poker: An Agile Approach to Estimation
The Essence of Planning Poker
At the core of Agile methodologies such as Scrum, Kanban, and Jira lies the principle of iterative development and efficient task estimation. One of the most popular estimation techniques used across these methods is Planning Poker, which combines collective intelligence, game theory, and the Fibonacci sequence to provide accurate and reasonable workload estimations.
How It Works: The Fibonacci Flavor
In Planning Poker, every task is assigned a Fibonacci number (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) based on its estimated complexity and time requirement. The Fibonacci sequence, known for its exponential growth, mirrors the uncertainty and risk associated with task estimation, helping to reflect the increasingly larger efforts required for complex tasks. It essentially transforms the abstract task complexity into a concrete numerical score, which is used to rationalize and prioritize the project backlog.
The Power of Anonymity and Gamification
Every member of the Agile team casts their vote anonymously in Planning Poker, preventing influence and promoting diversity in thought. The concept of gamification is also integrated into the process, where voting is akin to playing a game, thereby increasing engagement and ensuring an unbiased and accurate estimation of tasks.
Interpreting Estimations and Splitting Tickets
Upon revealing the votes, the highest and the lowest estimators elaborate on their reasoning, providing useful insight into different perspectives on task complexity. If a task garners a high estimation, such as 13 story points or above, it’s typically split into smaller, more manageable tasks. This prevents the overloading of the sprint and provides better visibility into individual task elements.
Statistical Insights: The Value of Voting Metrics
Key statistical metrics generated from the Planning Poker voting process, including min, max, avg, and count of votes hold significant value. The average vote tends to lean closer towards the maximum vote, hinting at the inherent inclination of teams to be conservative in their estimations. This tendency to be slightly pessimistic helps teams to cushion themselves against unforeseen complexities or delays, ensuring the successful and timely completion of sprints.
Fibonacci Sequence for Task Estimation: A Quick Guide
| Story Points | Description | Completion Time |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Straight forward task, requiring adjustments at few places | Max. 1h |
| 2 | Straight forward task, requires more work in implementation, increased documentation or information requirement | 2-4h |
| 3 | Either a straightforward task with high implementation effort or a complex task with clear problem-solution path | 4-8h |
| 5 | Complex tasks with unclear solutions and implementations | 8-16h |
| 8 | Complex tasks with unclear solutions leading to high implementation efforts | 16-32h |
| 13 | Very complex tasks with unclear solutions leading to very high implementation efforts | At least one week |