| I’m doing that for almost 15 years already, and lately I really don’t see value added by it. Unfortunately I’m still trying to find a way to replace it and get buy in from colleagues and management. 1. It doesn’t really help planning work, unless it’s always the same work. It’s a placebo. 1.1. e.g. team velocity is 20 points , but things are going to work very differently in a sprint with 4 stories of 5 SP and 10 stories of 2 SP. Mainly because the SP includes risk and complexity. 2. Recently saw someone comparing two teams, one doing 80 points the other doing 30. The problem: the former SP range was up to 13, the latter SP range was up to 5, rarely 8. So it still not transferable and meaningless outside it's own context. 3. Not comparable between peers, it doesn't map to the same levels of complexity, amount of work and risk for different people. Mostly people map SP to a range of days or hours and it differs as it's not standardized among peers. In my team setting I would prefer no estimates and a commitment based approach, but that kinda leaves management without numbers to count besides features and bugs delivered (which is good enough to me). |