| Sprint Calculations |
|
| IMPORTANT:
The following numbers tells us about the way we estimate, and yield relative numbers. |
|
| Over time
they provide predictability! Read the wrong way(or by wrong persons), the way
we estimate |
|
| will change and predictability is lost. |
|
|
| Current sprint, X: |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Commitment: |
|
| Estimated Dev Resources |
750 |
|
| Story Points |
20 |
|
| Estimated
Task Hours |
230 |
|
| Up Front Commitment Factor |
3,3 |
|
|
| Actual Delivery |
|
| Development Hours Spent |
845 |
|
| Story Points |
16 |
|
| Tasks
Delivered |
248 |
|
| Factor (Est. resources/delivered) |
3,0242 |
|
| Real Factor
(used/delivered) |
3,4073 |
|
|
| Unplanned Task Hours |
58 |
8
% |
of planned |
|
| Scoped In/Out
Tasks |
-40 |
|
| Average Task
Delivery Velocity |
25 |
|
|
| Empirical factor (commitment reliability) |
4,1 |
|
Res. used / ( delievered
+ scope up * uncertainty) |
|
| should
be the comparable up factor when committing to next sprint. There are many
numbers to compare, but this factor |
| is a good guide for predictability. |
|
|
| Note
to self: We didn't deliver what we committed to deliver.
There were to much overhead and unforseen tasks. However, |
| the
team agrees that we have learned and improved, and feels that a factor above
4 is unambitiously high. An improvement |
| to 3,5 should be feasible |
|
|
| User stories: |
SP |
|
| A |
5 |
|
| B |
3 |
|
| C |
2 |
|
| D |
6 |
|
| E |
4 |
|
| total |
20 |
|
|
| History: |
|
| |
|
| Sprint 1 |
|
| details |
|
| Sprint 2 |
|
| details |
|
| Sprint X-1 |
|
| details |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|