Browse files

Planning Poker and Fibonacci Explanation

Resolves #34
  • Loading branch information...
1 parent 37dc98e commit 80c76686bd02cf3c85efc7842c95d0cc6d35247e @Snugug Snugug committed Apr 26, 2014
Showing with 6 additions and 0 deletions.
  1. +6 −0
@@ -168,6 +168,12 @@ The functional requirements of a user story are based on the desired user experi
The size of a story is how much effort it will take to complete based on a relative scale of other similar features built, whereas value is a relative determination of how aligned with business needs a given feature is. Both size and value should be a [Fibonacci number](
+> Out of the first six numbers of the Fibonacci sequence, four are prime. This limits the possibilities to break down a task equally into smaller tasks to have multiple people work on it in parallel. Doing so could lead to the misconception that the speed of a task could scale proportionally with the [number of people working on it](#brookss-law). The 2^n series is most vulnerable to such a problem. The Fibonacci sequence in fact forces one to re-estimate the smaller tasks one by one.
+> [KillerInsect, StackOverflow](
+This applies not only to tasks, but to value as well. One very popular technique for estimating sizes (and can likewise be applied to value) is [planning poker]( Planning poker is a consensus-based technique where team members secretly estimate what they believe size or value should be and all estimates are revealed at once. This is done to avoid the cognitive basis of [anchoring]( where the first number spoken aloud sets the precedent for subsequent estimates. After the reveal, the team discusses their reasoning for their estimates, eventually coming to a consensus on the estimate. If the team cannot come to a consensus on estimates, the largest estimate is usually used. When planning, each team member's estimate holds equal weight, regardless of if they are a [lead](#leads).
For sizes, any size above 21 is usually too much to work on in a single iteration and the work should be split into smaller pieces and an epic, or overarching story, should be created. Size is not just based on development difficulty; it includes difficulty for all [team members](#roles-and-responsibilities) that would work on a feature for an iteration, including design and QA. Size should also account for risk, which could increase size for features that otherwise require little actual work to do. The size of a story should be agreed upon by consensus by all team members working on a feature. Sizing should happen throughout an [iteration](#iterations).
Value should be determined for each aspect that provides value, generally not to exceed 13 per aspect. A determination of how closely each [benefit statement](#benefit-statement) aligns with the [vision statement](#vision-statement) should always be included, with additional aspects such as importance in [information architecture](#information-architecture) or metrics for the feature or content type.

0 comments on commit 80c7668

Please sign in to comment.