Timeline for If you already release continuously, what are the benefits of a Scrum Sprint of constant length?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 2017 at 18:06 | comment | added | MrHinsh - Martin Hinshelwood | @RubberDuck I can agree to that. Although accuracy usually comes with a caveat "accurate to...?" what... I was trying to imply that the degree of accuracy is so wide as to make it completely useless as a measure. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 17:39 | comment | added | RubberDuck | @MrHinsh being velocity is a lagging measure, it is always accurate. Whether or not it's a useful indicator of future performance is another matter entirely... IME it's not. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 21:05 | comment | added | Venture2099 | No qualifier is needed at all. Velocity is velocity and it can be accurate. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 20:32 | comment | added | MrHinsh - Martin Hinshelwood | Useful is very much better than accurate. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 19:21 | comment | added | Venture2099 | I humbly suggest you apply a little more flexible thought to the absolute statements you are making. It's the antithesis of Scrum (and Agile values) and I can prove your absolute statement wrong with a single case study. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 19:20 | comment | added | Venture2099 | @MrHinsh well I guess I should throw away all of my teams evidence showing a stable velocity. Anecdote is not the plural of data. Just because you have not seen a stable velocity does not mean it does not exist and that it is not an aspiration. I have also never seen a military operation go according to plan but we don't stop planning. Velocity is also only useful as a measure over time. So by that standard velocity is ALWAYS accurate. Much like average goals scored per game is only useful over a season. It aids decision making but we don't use it as a fixed point. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:40 | comment | added | Casey Sprague | @MrHinsh perhaps "useful velocity" would be a better term to avoid this confusion. Updated. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:38 | history | edited | Casey Sprague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:32 | history | edited | Casey Sprague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body; deleted 30 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:14 | comment | added | MrHinsh - Martin Hinshelwood | I disagree; as the standard deviation of most teams velocity, sprint on sprint, is soo high that the average (mean) is too far removed from reality to be realistically used. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:13 | comment | added | Casey Sprague | @MrHinsh Precision and accuracy are very different. It's impossible to get a precise estimate based on velocity, but it is certainly possible to get an accurate estimate based on velocity. One can easily use velocity to estimate that a milestone will be reached in 9-12 months (accurate,) versus a specific date (precise.) | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 17:02 | comment | added | MrHinsh - Martin Hinshelwood | There is no such thing as an accurate velocity, it is a fallacy, and its pursuit is a waste of time. The Scrum Guide stipulates that you must get working software in front of your customers at least every 30 days. | |
| Feb 14, 2017 at 14:56 | history | edited | Casey Sprague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body; added 4 characters in body; deleted 31 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2017 at 14:26 | history | answered | Casey Sprague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |