There are several ways to do burn down charts in Scrum.
有几种方法可以在Scrum中烧掉图表。
Some people suggest using the story points of unfinished stories left as your burn down charts in Scrum.
有些人建议使用未完成的故事的故事点作为Scrum中的烧毁图表。
Pro: Only finished stories lower the chart
亲:只有完成的故事会降低图表
Contra: Chart doesn't move down in the beginning and then rapidly falls off
对比:图表在开始时不会向下移动,然后会迅速下降
Others suggest to use the number of tasks left
其他人建议使用剩下的任务数量
Pro: Chart will move down, you can see if it is above the finishing line
Pro:图表将向下移动,您可以看到它是否在终点线之上
Contra: You could move down to say 10 tasks left (hard tasks) in the end, and still have not one story finished. You've failed because only finished strories are good for your product owner.
反对:你最后可以向下移动说10个任务(硬任务),但仍然没有完成一个故事。你失败了,因为只有完成的strories对你的产品所有者有好处。
Is the solution to have both a points-of-not-finished-stories and a not-finished-task chart?
解决方案是否包含未完成故事点和未完成任务图表?
9 个解决方案
#1
7
We are using remainig time for sprint burndown - teams can see progress every day. If there are flat parts, than they really occured.
我们正在使用剩余时间进行冲刺燃烧 - 团队每天都可以看到进展。如果有平坦的部分,那么它们确实发生过。
In the release burndown we are using story points. Release planning is more about he feature completness, the time is tracked on the sprint level. Product owner is interested in completed stories.
在发行版中,我们使用的是故事点。发布计划更多的是关于他的功能完整性,时间在冲刺级别上进行跟踪。产品所有者对已完成的故事感兴趣。
Number of tasks is useless. This number can be changed every day, especially if you give a "freedom" to developers. They can split the task to smaller part without the change of the total time. Such statistic is useless. What is it indicating? Does it affect the goal of the sprint?
任务数量无用。这个数字每天都可以更改,特别是如果你给开发人员一个“*”。他们可以将任务拆分为较小的部分,而无需更改总时间。这样的统计是没用的。它表明了什么?它会影响冲刺的目标吗?
#2
4
In my opinion, tracking tasks is a rather suboptimal approach to tracking. In my experience, a story seldom really is the sum of its tasks - and often, while implementing a story, I find that the task breakdown was suboptimal, anyway.
在我看来,跟踪任务是一种相当不理想的跟踪方法。根据我的经验,一个故事很少是它的任务的总和 - 而且通常,在实现一个故事时,我发现任务分解不是最理想的。
And, while I find value in brainstorming tasks while estimating a story, I prefer to have stories that are small enough that there is no urge to track them at all. In fact, getting credit for tasks finished is highly misleading, as having even half of all identified tasks finished still isn't any guarantee that the Sprint will deliver any value at all. And that's what the stakeholders are interested in in the end: how much of the projected value will be actually delivered?
而且,虽然我在评估故事时发现头脑风暴任务的价值,但我更喜欢有足够小的故事,根本没有追踪它们的冲动。实际上,获得完成任务的信用是非常误导的,因为即使完成所有已识别任务的一半仍然不能保证Sprint将提供任何价值。这就是利益相关者最终感兴趣的内容:实际交付的预计价值有多少?
So, tracking stories and working on further breaking down stories both gives more accurate feedback and reduces the risk of no value delivery.
因此,跟踪故事并进一步分解故事,可以提供更准确的反馈,并降低无价值交付的风险。
Actually, when working with small stories, I don't see much value in Sprint burn down charts at all - just watching stories on the wall of cards move from "to do" to "in progress" to "done" should give you all the information you need. A Release burn down, though, that can be quite valuable, in my experience.
实际上,在处理小故事的时候,我看不到Sprint烧毁图表的重要价值 - 只是观看卡片墙上的故事从“待办”到“进行中”再到“完成”应该会给你所有您需要的信息。然而,根据我的经验,发布会被烧毁,这可能非常有价值。
#3
3
We usually need to track hours (estimate vs actual vs estimate to complete) against stories for the clients who asked for them. This allows us to do a few things:
我们通常需要跟踪要求他们的客户的故事小时数(估计与实际对比估计完成)。这允许我们做一些事情:
- Track progress for that client's needs so their project manager has some insight into what is happening.
- Review estimates against actual work required in order to improve our estimating ability.
- Bill clients for time actually spent in case it is part of an hourly rate job.
- Give developers feedback about their progress so they can manage distractions appropriately.
跟踪客户需求的进度,以便他们的项目经理能够深入了解正在发生的事情。
审查所需的实际工作估算,以提高我们的估算能力。
比尔客户实际上花费的时间是因为它是小时工作的一部分。
向开发人员提供有关其进度的反馈,以便他们能够恰当地管理干扰。
We also track completed stories for our own burndown, but as has been pointed out this can lead to a plateau effect at the start of the sprint that serves to tell us very little useful info (other than that we're not doing enough in parallel).
我们还跟踪我们自己的燃尽故事,但正如已经指出的那样,这可以在冲刺开始时产生一个平台效应,这可以告诉我们很少有用的信息(除了我们并行做得不够) )。
#4
2
Burndowns (or even "burn ups") should only indicate work remaining.
Burndowns(甚至“燃烧”)应仅表明剩余的工作。
If you've half done a story you can't ship it, and it doesn't count. If you end the spring with a story half-done - tasks that were done in it don't count if you're measuring velocity.
如果你已经完成了一半的故事而无法发货,那就不算数了。如果你以一半的故事结束弹簧 - 如果你正在测量速度,那么在其中完成的任务就不算数了。
Just chart stories left to be completed.
只是图表故事还有待完成。
This is a tougher measure but there's no use massaging the figures - scrum is supposed to communicate bad news so that things will get fixed.
这是一个更难的措施,但没有用于按摩数字 - scrum应该传达坏消息,以便事情得到修复。
#5
0
We do both, as if we didn't include tasks our line would plateau in a way that makes it look like nothing is getting done.
我们两个都做了,就好像我们没有包含任务一样,我们的线路会以一种看起来像什么都没有完成的方式稳定下来。
If a story takes 2 days to finish, then you have a flat line for 2 days, and there's no way to tell whether the team is sitting on their thumbs, or that work increased (thus a jump in task hours).
如果一个故事需要2天才能完成,那么你有2天的平坦线,并且没有办法判断团队是否坐在他们的拇指上,或者工作量是否增加(因此任务时间会有所增加)。
Of course the task line can plummet without contributing to finishing stories, which is an anti-pattern that can occur if developers can choose tasks at will.
当然,如果开发人员可以随意选择任务,那么任务线就会直线下降而不会影响完成故事,这是一种反模式。
#6
0
Tracking the number of remaining tasks is not very helpful as the tasks are likely to have different sizes.
跟踪剩余任务的数量并不是很有用,因为任务可能具有不同的大小。
You should not find yourself in a situation where the team complete ten tasks and no backlog item (actually, this is possible if you have ten developers) : every developer should not pick up tasks from another backlog item (story) until he completes the backlog item the first stories he did belongs too - event if the task form the other story is harder than the remaining tasks from the started sotry.
您不应该发现自己处于团队完成十个任务而没有积压项目的情况下(实际上,如果您有十个开发人员,这是可能的):每个开发人员都不应该从另一个积压项目(故事)中获取任务,直到他完成积压工作项目他所做的第一个故事也是如此 - 如果任务形成另一个故事的事件比从开始的sotry中的剩余任务更难。
#7
0
I used a lot the "hours remaining" for burndown. Team always find that tracking burndown by time is close to time tracking system, add overhead of administration and is really not accurate unless we transform humans to robots.
我经常使用“剩余时间”进行燃尽。团队总是发现按时间追踪燃尽与时间跟踪系统相近,增加了管理的开销,除非我们将人类转变为机器人,否则实际上并不准确。
I am using tasks burndown (total tasks, new tasks, done tasks). Much much better. It is true that you do not see the size of the tasks that are done or new. But team meet everyday and that's where you catch problems. As well, I coach team to not create big tasks (4 to 6 hrs max). Also, I added an other chart with New tasks and Done tasks by day. Team found that the burndown by tasks make more sense that using hours.
我正在使用任务燃尽(总任务,新任务,完成任务)。好多了。确实,您没有看到已完成或新的任务的大小。但团队每天都会见面,这就是你遇到问题的地方。同样,我指导团队不要创造大任务(最多4到6小时)。此外,我在白天添加了另一个包含新任务和完成任务的图表。团队发现任务的燃尽使用小时更有意义。
After the team understand the values of breaking down stories in tasks, I want to try burndown by stories. So having small stories with a max of 5 or 8 story points. From Jeff Sutherland blog, this is a big step to get a team to high perform.
在团队理解了在任务中分解故事的价值之后,我想尝试按故事进行烧毁。因此,拥有最多5或8个故事点的小故事。来自Jeff Sutherland的博客,这是让团队表现出色的重要一步。
In addition, I'd like to mention that a burndown is just a "At a glance representation of progress". Most important and even more relevant for the team and PO's are: what is being mentioned in daily about the tasks + story progress percentages + list of impediments. After a while, management and team members don't care much about the burndown (or burn up).
另外,我想提一下,燃尽只是“一目了然的进步”。对团队和PO来说最重要甚至更相关的是:每天提到的关于任务+故事进展百分比+障碍列表的内容。过了一段时间,管理层和团队成员并不关心燃尽(或燃烧)。
#8
-1
We use tasks because it provides so much more granularity. Graphing only the completion of stories (which we do 5-10 per two-week sprint) will only show a change every day or two and, as you mention, won't move much at all during the beginning of the sprint.
我们使用任务是因为它提供了更多的粒度。仅绘制故事的完成情况(我们每两周冲刺5-10次)只会显示每天或每两天的变化,正如您所提到的,在冲刺开始时根本不会移动太多。
Another useful thing my team has found is using a stacked line chart with one line for each of "To Do", "In Progress", "Ready for QA", and "Validated". This way it is easy to see any phase in the process that is creating a backup.
我的团队发现的另一个有用的事情是使用一个堆叠的折线图,每行“待办事项”,“进行中”,“准备QA”和“验证”。通过这种方式,可以轻松查看正在创建备份的流程中的任何阶段。
#9
-1
Use hours remaining for Sprint burndowns - During sprint planning, estimate all the work to complete a story according to your definition of done - Each day, developers and testers re-estimate the hours remaining for all their work (changing upwards or downwards) - track the sprint burndown via Hours remaining - great indicator of how well or badly a Sprint is going
使用Sprint burndowns的剩余时间 - 在sprint计划期间,根据您对完成的定义估算完成故事的所有工作 - 每天,开发人员和测试人员重新估计他们所有工作的剩余时间(向上或向下更改) - 跟踪通过剩余小时数进行冲刺燃烧 - 很好地指示了Sprint的进展情况
This is not appropriate for release burndowns as you do not breakdown all stories in the backlog, only those for the next sprint in the sprint planning workshop. So use Story point burndowns (relative size and complexity values derived by the whole team during planning poker sessions). This is a great indicator of progress towards your release.
这不适合发布burndowns,因为你没有分解积压中的所有故事,只有sprint规划研讨会中下一个冲刺的故事。因此,使用Story point burndowns(整个团队在计划扑克课程期间得出的相对大小和复杂度值)。这是发布进度的重要指标。
#1
7
We are using remainig time for sprint burndown - teams can see progress every day. If there are flat parts, than they really occured.
我们正在使用剩余时间进行冲刺燃烧 - 团队每天都可以看到进展。如果有平坦的部分,那么它们确实发生过。
In the release burndown we are using story points. Release planning is more about he feature completness, the time is tracked on the sprint level. Product owner is interested in completed stories.
在发行版中,我们使用的是故事点。发布计划更多的是关于他的功能完整性,时间在冲刺级别上进行跟踪。产品所有者对已完成的故事感兴趣。
Number of tasks is useless. This number can be changed every day, especially if you give a "freedom" to developers. They can split the task to smaller part without the change of the total time. Such statistic is useless. What is it indicating? Does it affect the goal of the sprint?
任务数量无用。这个数字每天都可以更改,特别是如果你给开发人员一个“*”。他们可以将任务拆分为较小的部分,而无需更改总时间。这样的统计是没用的。它表明了什么?它会影响冲刺的目标吗?
#2
4
In my opinion, tracking tasks is a rather suboptimal approach to tracking. In my experience, a story seldom really is the sum of its tasks - and often, while implementing a story, I find that the task breakdown was suboptimal, anyway.
在我看来,跟踪任务是一种相当不理想的跟踪方法。根据我的经验,一个故事很少是它的任务的总和 - 而且通常,在实现一个故事时,我发现任务分解不是最理想的。
And, while I find value in brainstorming tasks while estimating a story, I prefer to have stories that are small enough that there is no urge to track them at all. In fact, getting credit for tasks finished is highly misleading, as having even half of all identified tasks finished still isn't any guarantee that the Sprint will deliver any value at all. And that's what the stakeholders are interested in in the end: how much of the projected value will be actually delivered?
而且,虽然我在评估故事时发现头脑风暴任务的价值,但我更喜欢有足够小的故事,根本没有追踪它们的冲动。实际上,获得完成任务的信用是非常误导的,因为即使完成所有已识别任务的一半仍然不能保证Sprint将提供任何价值。这就是利益相关者最终感兴趣的内容:实际交付的预计价值有多少?
So, tracking stories and working on further breaking down stories both gives more accurate feedback and reduces the risk of no value delivery.
因此,跟踪故事并进一步分解故事,可以提供更准确的反馈,并降低无价值交付的风险。
Actually, when working with small stories, I don't see much value in Sprint burn down charts at all - just watching stories on the wall of cards move from "to do" to "in progress" to "done" should give you all the information you need. A Release burn down, though, that can be quite valuable, in my experience.
实际上,在处理小故事的时候,我看不到Sprint烧毁图表的重要价值 - 只是观看卡片墙上的故事从“待办”到“进行中”再到“完成”应该会给你所有您需要的信息。然而,根据我的经验,发布会被烧毁,这可能非常有价值。
#3
3
We usually need to track hours (estimate vs actual vs estimate to complete) against stories for the clients who asked for them. This allows us to do a few things:
我们通常需要跟踪要求他们的客户的故事小时数(估计与实际对比估计完成)。这允许我们做一些事情:
- Track progress for that client's needs so their project manager has some insight into what is happening.
- Review estimates against actual work required in order to improve our estimating ability.
- Bill clients for time actually spent in case it is part of an hourly rate job.
- Give developers feedback about their progress so they can manage distractions appropriately.
跟踪客户需求的进度,以便他们的项目经理能够深入了解正在发生的事情。
审查所需的实际工作估算,以提高我们的估算能力。
比尔客户实际上花费的时间是因为它是小时工作的一部分。
向开发人员提供有关其进度的反馈,以便他们能够恰当地管理干扰。
We also track completed stories for our own burndown, but as has been pointed out this can lead to a plateau effect at the start of the sprint that serves to tell us very little useful info (other than that we're not doing enough in parallel).
我们还跟踪我们自己的燃尽故事,但正如已经指出的那样,这可以在冲刺开始时产生一个平台效应,这可以告诉我们很少有用的信息(除了我们并行做得不够) )。
#4
2
Burndowns (or even "burn ups") should only indicate work remaining.
Burndowns(甚至“燃烧”)应仅表明剩余的工作。
If you've half done a story you can't ship it, and it doesn't count. If you end the spring with a story half-done - tasks that were done in it don't count if you're measuring velocity.
如果你已经完成了一半的故事而无法发货,那就不算数了。如果你以一半的故事结束弹簧 - 如果你正在测量速度,那么在其中完成的任务就不算数了。
Just chart stories left to be completed.
只是图表故事还有待完成。
This is a tougher measure but there's no use massaging the figures - scrum is supposed to communicate bad news so that things will get fixed.
这是一个更难的措施,但没有用于按摩数字 - scrum应该传达坏消息,以便事情得到修复。
#5
0
We do both, as if we didn't include tasks our line would plateau in a way that makes it look like nothing is getting done.
我们两个都做了,就好像我们没有包含任务一样,我们的线路会以一种看起来像什么都没有完成的方式稳定下来。
If a story takes 2 days to finish, then you have a flat line for 2 days, and there's no way to tell whether the team is sitting on their thumbs, or that work increased (thus a jump in task hours).
如果一个故事需要2天才能完成,那么你有2天的平坦线,并且没有办法判断团队是否坐在他们的拇指上,或者工作量是否增加(因此任务时间会有所增加)。
Of course the task line can plummet without contributing to finishing stories, which is an anti-pattern that can occur if developers can choose tasks at will.
当然,如果开发人员可以随意选择任务,那么任务线就会直线下降而不会影响完成故事,这是一种反模式。
#6
0
Tracking the number of remaining tasks is not very helpful as the tasks are likely to have different sizes.
跟踪剩余任务的数量并不是很有用,因为任务可能具有不同的大小。
You should not find yourself in a situation where the team complete ten tasks and no backlog item (actually, this is possible if you have ten developers) : every developer should not pick up tasks from another backlog item (story) until he completes the backlog item the first stories he did belongs too - event if the task form the other story is harder than the remaining tasks from the started sotry.
您不应该发现自己处于团队完成十个任务而没有积压项目的情况下(实际上,如果您有十个开发人员,这是可能的):每个开发人员都不应该从另一个积压项目(故事)中获取任务,直到他完成积压工作项目他所做的第一个故事也是如此 - 如果任务形成另一个故事的事件比从开始的sotry中的剩余任务更难。
#7
0
I used a lot the "hours remaining" for burndown. Team always find that tracking burndown by time is close to time tracking system, add overhead of administration and is really not accurate unless we transform humans to robots.
我经常使用“剩余时间”进行燃尽。团队总是发现按时间追踪燃尽与时间跟踪系统相近,增加了管理的开销,除非我们将人类转变为机器人,否则实际上并不准确。
I am using tasks burndown (total tasks, new tasks, done tasks). Much much better. It is true that you do not see the size of the tasks that are done or new. But team meet everyday and that's where you catch problems. As well, I coach team to not create big tasks (4 to 6 hrs max). Also, I added an other chart with New tasks and Done tasks by day. Team found that the burndown by tasks make more sense that using hours.
我正在使用任务燃尽(总任务,新任务,完成任务)。好多了。确实,您没有看到已完成或新的任务的大小。但团队每天都会见面,这就是你遇到问题的地方。同样,我指导团队不要创造大任务(最多4到6小时)。此外,我在白天添加了另一个包含新任务和完成任务的图表。团队发现任务的燃尽使用小时更有意义。
After the team understand the values of breaking down stories in tasks, I want to try burndown by stories. So having small stories with a max of 5 or 8 story points. From Jeff Sutherland blog, this is a big step to get a team to high perform.
在团队理解了在任务中分解故事的价值之后,我想尝试按故事进行烧毁。因此,拥有最多5或8个故事点的小故事。来自Jeff Sutherland的博客,这是让团队表现出色的重要一步。
In addition, I'd like to mention that a burndown is just a "At a glance representation of progress". Most important and even more relevant for the team and PO's are: what is being mentioned in daily about the tasks + story progress percentages + list of impediments. After a while, management and team members don't care much about the burndown (or burn up).
另外,我想提一下,燃尽只是“一目了然的进步”。对团队和PO来说最重要甚至更相关的是:每天提到的关于任务+故事进展百分比+障碍列表的内容。过了一段时间,管理层和团队成员并不关心燃尽(或燃烧)。
#8
-1
We use tasks because it provides so much more granularity. Graphing only the completion of stories (which we do 5-10 per two-week sprint) will only show a change every day or two and, as you mention, won't move much at all during the beginning of the sprint.
我们使用任务是因为它提供了更多的粒度。仅绘制故事的完成情况(我们每两周冲刺5-10次)只会显示每天或每两天的变化,正如您所提到的,在冲刺开始时根本不会移动太多。
Another useful thing my team has found is using a stacked line chart with one line for each of "To Do", "In Progress", "Ready for QA", and "Validated". This way it is easy to see any phase in the process that is creating a backup.
我的团队发现的另一个有用的事情是使用一个堆叠的折线图,每行“待办事项”,“进行中”,“准备QA”和“验证”。通过这种方式,可以轻松查看正在创建备份的流程中的任何阶段。
#9
-1
Use hours remaining for Sprint burndowns - During sprint planning, estimate all the work to complete a story according to your definition of done - Each day, developers and testers re-estimate the hours remaining for all their work (changing upwards or downwards) - track the sprint burndown via Hours remaining - great indicator of how well or badly a Sprint is going
使用Sprint burndowns的剩余时间 - 在sprint计划期间,根据您对完成的定义估算完成故事的所有工作 - 每天,开发人员和测试人员重新估计他们所有工作的剩余时间(向上或向下更改) - 跟踪通过剩余小时数进行冲刺燃烧 - 很好地指示了Sprint的进展情况
This is not appropriate for release burndowns as you do not breakdown all stories in the backlog, only those for the next sprint in the sprint planning workshop. So use Story point burndowns (relative size and complexity values derived by the whole team during planning poker sessions). This is a great indicator of progress towards your release.
这不适合发布burndowns,因为你没有分解积压中的所有故事,只有sprint规划研讨会中下一个冲刺的故事。因此,使用Story point burndowns(整个团队在计划扑克课程期间得出的相对大小和复杂度值)。这是发布进度的重要指标。