Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Using cost spent to derive the value created works when the scope is known and planning was done based on WBS.
In Agile the target is moving and basically there is no baseline. The Story Points are not measuring value but time, therefore using them to measure the "earned value" is probably wrong.
What do you think? Saving Changes...
Drew CraigSr. Agile & Product Coach| VanguardPhiladelphia, Pa, United States
Oct 10, 2018 10:13 PM
Replying to Stelian ROMAN
...
Some teams do equate story points with hours, although they use Fibonacci to express uncertainty and the (lack of) confidence in the estimation. However my point was that story points are units of time (effort) and can't (shouldn't) be used to measure functionality or value. If the EVM graph is constructed based on time units it's not a representation of the value earned. It is a representation of the time and/or cost spent but not the value produced. In my opinion Agile should be measure the functionality delivered to the users not the warehouse stock.
Right, exactly! As stated earlier, Story points are more a measure of relative complexity/effort rather than time or value, and as such, apply a corresponding Fibonacci value to encapsulate a more encompassing measure. And sure, in the end, no matter the method, we are ultimately measuring in some fashion of time, though, not a 1:1 correlation. Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Oct 10, 2018 10:06 PM
Replying to Drew Craig
...
Figured you had seen them all.
Agree, the EV is simply a representation of perceived value and not necessarily a true reflection of actual tangible value.
I've seen the 3 and others, far from seeing all of them :) Saving Changes...
Eric IsomOwner| learn.pmguaranteed.comUt, United States
Despite the name, Earned Value does not measure the value created by the work performed. Nor does it measure time or functionality. It measures the work performed so far in terms of the amount of money that was budgeted for that work. Earned Value really is an unfortunate choice of words that causes a lot of misunderstanding.
For example, suppose a feature was expected to cost $10,000 to develop. Once that feature is completed, the Earned Value of that feature is $10,000. No matter what it actually cost, and no matter how much it is worth to the organization. Suppose that this feature cost $12,000 to build. Earned Value metrics would indicate a negative cost variance as a result. However, suppose that this feature allows the organization to earn $100,000 more in sales of the software. It's value to the organization could be much greater than the cost to build it, or than the budgeted cost to build it, but its Earned Value is still $10,000 by definition. Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
@Eric, thank you. I also have doubts on the validity of the term 'earned'. Technically the one who earned is the vendor because the client must pay for the work done. But from the client point of view 95% of the work completed may not be "useable" as per the Scrum Guide:
At the end of a Sprint, the new Increment must be "Done," which means it must be in useable condition and meet the Scrum Team's definition of "Done" Saving Changes...
