Drunken PM

by
Drunken Boxing for Project Managers “The main feature of the drunkard boxing is to hide combative hits in drunkard-like, unsteady movements and actions so as to confuse the opponent. The secret of this style of boxing is maintaining a clear mind while giving a drunken appearance.” Yeah... just like that… but with network diagrams and burndown charts… and a wee bit less vodka.
Agile | Agile 2010 | agile 2015 | Agile Alliance | agile transformation | agile2015 | AgileThinking | AOW4PM | apple | art of war | Bas De Baar | body language | branding | Brian Bozzuto | capacity | certified scrum trainer | Chris Li | cloud | cloud worker | commitment | Corkulous | CSM for PMP | cst | Dave Prior | David Bland | Digital PM | digitalpm | Docs to Go | Don Kim | dpm | dpm2013 | EMEA | emotional intelligence | Essential Scrum | facebook | field guide | FIRM REPORT | Flipboard | Global Economics | Greg Balestrero | GTD | Howard Sublett | Idea Wallets | IOS4 | iPad | iPad 2 | iPad2 | iPhone | IT&T SIG | Jesse Fewell | jim benson | kanban | Kathy Compton | Ken Schwaber | Kuala Lumpur | lacey | Leadership Meeting | LeadingAgile | lean | LeanKit | Livescribe | Livescribe Pulse | Mac | MacWorld | Macworld 2011 | Malaysia | Marshall Rosenberg | mashup | MDEC | Merlin | Mike Cohn | Mike Sutton | Mike Vizdos | mitch lacey | MITPM | modus cooperandi | Non-violent communication | Notes Plus | NVC | off shore | Offshore | Olaf Lewitz | Oredev | Øredev | overcommitment | Panda Transport | Papershow | personal branding | personal kanban | personal productivity | PMI | PMI Portugal | Product Owner | productivity | Project | project management | project manaqement | project planning | Project Potion | Projects At Work | projectshrink | ProjectWizards | pulse | Ricardo Vargas | Robyn Meredith | Scrum | Scrum Alliance | scrum but | scrum field guide | Scrum Gathering | ScrumFest | Shane Hastie | SK Khor | social media | sprint planning | SXSW | telecom | Thierry Holoweck | Things | Thushara | Tobias Mayer | Tom Perry | troy magennis | twitter | value | VCP | video conferencing | Vivek Angiras | vocal technique | waste | What We Say Matters | Wijewardena | WIzewerks | show all posts

About this Blog

RSS

Recent Posts

Certified Agile Leadership Training with Olaf

Don Kim - I Think, Therefore I Plan

Agile Coach to Agile Gamer - Peter Saddington

Scrum in School - A Case Study of Grandview Prep's Transformation

Forecasting Tools Based on Team Performance with Troy Magennis

Agile Coach to Agile Gamer - Peter Saddington

Peter Saddington, the founder of AgileScout.com, is an Agile Coach, Certified Scrum Trainer, Author, Entrepreneur and Scientist. On March 4, 2017 he put up a blog post on AgileScout.com announcing a new experiment he is running... on himself.  

Taking a step back from helping others adopt Agile, Peter is now using Agile to transform his life, and he's starting with his career. He's going from being a full time Agile Consultant to a full time professional video game player.  It might sound a bit insane, but his reasoning and research are sound. In this interview I got the chance to talk with Peter about his new experiment, why he's doing it and how he approaching transforming his life.

Click here to read Peter's manifesto: http://agilescout.com/time-for-change/
Click here to see Peter's video channel:  First15
Click here to follow Peter on Twitter
 

Posted on: March 26, 2017 06:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

How to Avoid Overcommitment During Sprint Planning

 

Awhile back I was working on an Agile coaching gig with Tom Smallwood. We were working with a team that moving to Scrum and was having a particularly difficult time meeting their commitments.  Stories were being estimated in Story Points using the Fibonacci sequence and they were breaking stories down into tasks that were then estimated in ideal engineering hours. Stories were (mostly) small enough to go from card on wall to potentially shippable in about 2 days. Tasks were kept to between 4 and 12 hours. Unfortunately, despite following the basic guidelines we were giving them, they were still WAY over committing each Sprint.

 

Tom was the first one to notice that even though they were all confident in their ability to get the work done at the end of a Sprint Planning meeting, what they were confident about was in fact, completely impossible. What was happening was that each person was assumed to have a capacity of 8 ideal engineering hours per day. Since we were working in two-week iterations, this meant each person was on the hook for 80 hours of productive working time in a Sprint. 

 

The way we addressed this initially was to ask them to plan for no more than 6 productive working hours per person each day. This helped, but it still wasn't cutting it. The problem was that each person had more that they were responsible for than just the project we were working on. (Yes, this is not ideal, but it was reality at the time.)

 

The solution we came up with was very simple and it is one I have used on every team I worked with since. It adds an extra step to the Sprint Planning ceremony, but it has been invaluable in helping teams understand their capacity and preventing over commitment. 

 

(Disclaimer - this involves using relative Story Point Estimation for Stories and Ideal Engineering Hours for Tasks. There are many who do things differently and have great success - which is awesome... what follows is just what I have found to work well for me and the teams I've worked with.)

 

What we added was a step in the 2nd half of Sprint Planning. After the team has taken the User Stories (estimated in Story Points) and broken them down into Tasks (estimated in Ideal Engineering Hours), we would go around the circle and ask each team member to estimate how many ideal engineering hours he/she could commit to being responsible for in the upcoming Sprint. One of the most critical parts of this is the idea that the commitment being made is not to the PO, but to the other members of the development/engineering team. So, if I tell my team I'm good for 35 hours, then my team can count on me to be responsible for 35 hours of task work. If I commit to that and do not contribute that amount of time, my team members will have to cover for the work I've not done. While this should go without saying, I have found it to be helpful to mention when starting this part of Sprint Planning. 

 

So, going around the circle, each team member has to be aware of how much time they can commit to contributing. This means they need to account for a lot of the things that get in their way.  

 

Here is how I normally coach people to think through this:

 

In a two-week iteration, you begin with 10 working days. However, I normally block out 1 day for Sprint Planning, 1 day for the Sprint Review and Sprint Retrospective, 1/4 day for the 8 remaining days during which the team will hold a 15 minute daily standup and 1/4 day for an Estimation/Story Meeting. While blocking out 1 whole day for Sprint Planning and 1 whole day for the Sprint Review and Sprint Retrospective meetings is more than the Scrum Guide calls for, I have found that it is more realistic to working under the assumption that the team will get little else done on those days. 

 

If the Sprint is 2 weeks long, we start with 10 working days. Once we block out the time mentioned above, we end up at 7.5 working days.

 

If we assume each person can be productive for a maximum of 6 hours per day, then:

 6 hours/day * 7.5 days = 45 

So, the absolute Maximum Possible Productive Hours (MPPH) for any individual in a two- week Sprint is 45 hours. 

 

We then ask each person to total up the amount of time they expect to lose during the upcoming Sprint to the following events that are not part of the Scrum Framework:

 

  • Standing Meetings  - recurring meetings held each week that will keep them from working on the project
  • Holiday/PTO - expected
  • Vacation/Sick time - expected or averaged
  • Medical/Dental/Other Personal Appointments - expected or averaged
  • Emergency Fixes* - average time lost per Sprint to emergencies which require them to temporarily abandon their work on the project
  • Misc. Additional Time - Any additional time they feel they should block out to address other issues, work or personal, which will inhibit their ability to contribute to the project during the Sprint

* Getting pulled away from a project to deal with emergencies that are not related to the project is a dysfunction that will impair the team's ability to realize the full benefits of Scrum. However, in several organizations I have worked with, it is a constant reality. When things break, and the money stops flowing, it's all hands on deck.

 

The total of the above is the Interruption Time (IT) that each team member must subtract from his or her   MPPH. The amount of time left is the Revised Maximum Possible Productive Hours (RMPH).

 

If the individual is only working on a single project, then the RMPH is the amount of time that individual should feel comfortable sharing with their team members as their Committable Productive Time (CPT). 

 

If the individual is split on multiple projects, then they should multiply the percentage of their time that is allocated to the project by the RMPH. They should then subtract an additional 10% from the result (for context switching) to get their Committable Productive Time (CPT).

 

Here is an example of the above...

 

Interruption Time:

  • 4 hours standing meetings
  • 8 hours PTO
  • 3 hours for dentist appointment
  • 5 hours average time lost to Emergency Fixes
  • 5 hours subtracted because I will just be returning from overseas and I expect the jet lag to have a negative impact on my productivity for a few days

Interruption Time (IT) = 25 hours

 

45 (MPPH)

- 25 (IT)

20 (RMPH) 

 

If I am split across 2 projects at 50% each...

 

20 (RMPH)

*50% allocation

10 hours

-10% (context switching)

9 hours of Committable Productive Time

 

In talking through this, it is very common to see jaws drop. However, if each person on the team is doing this, then the team will have a realistic understanding of its' work capacity in a given Sprint. While the idea of having to tell someone responsible for your performance review that in a two-week period that you can only be counted on for 9 hours of time may be scary, it is honest. If we are practicing Scrum and sticking with transparency (one of the 3 legs of Scrum), and we are being responsible to our fellow team members, this is the most responsible, transparent thing we can do. 

 

Once each team member has shared their CPT, they are totaled up and this is the Team's Committable Productive Time (TCPT). As long as the total number of estimated ideal task hours does not exceed the TCPT, then the team should feel comfortable making a commitment to the Product Owner for the Stories they will complete during the Sprint. If the number of estimated ideal task hours does exceed the TCPT, then the team may have to negotiate with the Product Owner to reduce the work being planned for the Sprint before they make a commitment. 

 

I have also seen teams break things down even further into number of hours for development, testing, etc., but what is above is typically as deep as I go with it.

 

It adds an extra step, but it helps the team members inspect and adapt their own workload and capacity. This will also better enable them to meet their commitment in a Sprint; IMHO, the benefits of this far exceed the few extra minutes it will take for a team to make sure they are not overcommitting. 

 

 

 

 

Posted on: October 28, 2012 01:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Catching up... Podcastapalooza

I'm ludicrously behind in keeping the blog up to date... working on that... here is a list of all the podcasts I've done for Projects At Work since The last posting about Mitch Lacey. There is a lot of great Agile stuff here...

Howard Sublett from BigVisible
Part 1 of 1

Martin Rosenqvist on Agile Transformation
Part 1 of 2
Part 2 of 2

Tom Kealey on Getting Agile transformation to Stick
Part 1 of 2
Part 2 of 2

Kenny Rubin on his new book Essential Scrum
Part 1 of 2
Part 2 of 2

Dan Greening on Enterprise Scrum
Part 1 of 3
Part 2 of 3
Part 3 of 3


 

Posted on: October 28, 2012 12:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Podcast Interview with Mitch Lacey, author of The Scrum Field Guide

 

My Projects at Work podcast interview with Mitch Lacey, author of The Scrum Field Guide.

 

Also, check out my review of the book here.

Posted on: May 24, 2012 12:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Book Review: The Scrum Field Guide: Practical Advice For Your First Year

Check out my review of Mitch Lacey's new book

The Scrum Field Guide: Practical Advice For Your First Year

on Projects At Work.

Posted on: May 17, 2012 12:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
ADVERTISEMENTS
ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors