MSF Agile: risk versus story points?

I am working on creating an initial set of user stories for a new project, and this is my first time using MSF Agile. I have about 100 user stories, and I assigned them all to areas and iterations, but the next step for me is to assign all of their risk values, history, and stack level. However, I find that I assign almost mirror opposite values ​​to risk points and history, i.e. All my stories with one high risk are 3 story points, and all my stories with 3 low risks are 1 story.

The MSDN documentation defines these fields as such:

" History points : a subjective unit of measure that captures the size of a user's history. If you assign more points to a user's history, you indicate that it takes more work to implement it."

" Risk : subjective rating of relative uncertainty around the successful completion of the user's history. You can specify the following values: 1 - High, 2 - Medium, 3 - Low p>

I find that they go hand in hand to a large extent in every situation that I have encountered. In your experience, what examples of high-risk stories are worth a few stories, or low-risk stories that cost a lot of points?

I need help in thinking about this in different ways. How should I think about it?

+3
source share
2 answers

That should not be so.

It is possible to realize most of the story without risk. Risk does not mean that it will take a long time, but rather the likelihood that it will take WAY more than you think.

An example of risk history 3 is a set of graphical interfaces that must be carefully placed and approved by each client. You know that this will take a long time, but you do not expect more than one or two iterations to the screen.

1 3 -, , API. , , (, - , - , , -).

1- , , , , , , ..

+1

, ...

Story Points - / . , , A B. , "Agile Estimating and Planning" .

, .

, , , ""... .. , . .

, , / , , -. , , , -, .. , , . - , - .

, .

+1

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1771596/


All Articles