4 ms·

If someone votes 1 while the others votes 8, he’s either too optimistic or an expert on that subject. The points themselves don’t matter, because things are eit

If someone votes 1 while the others votes 8, he’s either too optimistic or an expert on that subject. The points themselves don’t matter, because things are either hard or easy, and that usually depends on the person doing it. No committee can decide that. And they will either get done or cancelled any way. The only things that really matter is their current priority. And that’s the business decision (influenced by several factors, including the advices of the devs). The points assignments are thus useless and you’re spending 1 hour every two weeks on it. But if it makes everyone happy… And as for talking as a team, we can just do it without any other excuse than discussing the project and the methodologies.

shiroiushi 2y ago
The points assignment wasn't useless; it was just for tracking relative difficulty. Some tasks were trivial, only taking a couple of hours, so they got a "1", while other tasks were projected to take 2 weeks, so those got an "13". The idea was to pick a bunch of tasks that were basically do-able within the 2-week sprint, and ignore the rest, so while 1 dev might take on a 13-point task and nothing else, another dev might take a bunch of 1s and 5s. And yes, the priority had to be factored in too, which was influenced by both customer requests and dev input (i.e., "this is super easy and I can have it done today" or "this is difficult and will take a month"). >And as for talking as a team, we can just do it without any other excuse than discussing the project and the methodologies. You can, but no one actually does it in practice. Individual team members might chat together from time to time, but putting everyone in one room together forces them to interact with all their other team members and talk about real work-related stuff, instead of just hanging out with their one buddy and talking about something irrelevant.

shiroiushi 2y ago

The points assignment wasn't useless; it was just for tracking relative difficulty. Some tasks were trivial, only taking a couple of hours, so they got a "1", while other tasks were projected to take 2 weeks, so those got an "13". The idea was to pick a bunch of tasks that were basically do-able within the 2-week sprint, and ignore the rest, so while 1 dev might take on a 13-point task and nothing else, another dev might take a bunch of 1s and 5s. And yes, the priority had to be factored in too, which was influenced by both customer requests and dev input (i.e., "this is super easy and I can have it done today" or "this is difficult and will take a month"). >And as for talking as a team, we can just do it without any other excuse than discussing the project and the methodologies. You can, but no one actually does it in practice. Individual team members might chat together from time to time, but putting everyone in one room together forces them to interact with all their other team members and talk about real work-related stuff, instead of just hanging out with their one buddy and talking about something irrelevant.