Since “to be prepared is half the victory”, I’d like to collect ideas and comments here by answering the question:
“What would be needed or changed, so in Jan/22 we are effectively using points as weights for our tasks”.
Let’s be very pragmatic here.
@SebS It might be useful to take a few existing tasks of varying types and show how they would translate to weights as an example here so everyone has the same understanding.
Agreed with @idlethread that it would be good to do an example or two.
I personally prefer points instead of hours. In our case it would require scaling or agreement what to do with monsters of 200+ hours. Eg. not assign points to epics, only to decomposed tasks
@idlethread By (Scrum) definition, points are not transferable to hours (and they shouldn’t be). I used to do those estimates similarly to this: Agile in Practice: Planning Poker - YouTube (4mins)
There are also other tools to do this.
@marta IMO, 200+ monsters should be decomposed further, up to tiny creatures like 20-30points maximum
An EPIC is the total of decomposed tasks.
CC: Please @rzr have a look at this
Well I don’t have any strong preference , as long as everyone is speaking the same language. Points can vary depending on context, so are hours (an expert would take less time than a jr developer).
Something that could help clarification is adding labels that tell if task is time consuming and/or have low complexity and then a magic formula could translate this to time and money…
I’ll update this post if I have better idea to suggest.