elr.png
elr.png
elb.png
elb.png
elb.png

Estimation Cards for teams

for 5 people

el4.png

The cost

175 UAH

When buying a set of 2 decks, the cost is 300 UAH
yellow.png
red.png
blue.png
grey.png

In the meantime, there is no need to worry about it. ”

  • we do not shift all responsibility and risks for the assessment to a specific contractor. (there are people who often overestimate / underestimate estimates)

  • when giving a grade, the team is not influenced by whoever is "faster" or "loudest" will be the first to name the grade and influence the others

  • the tool stimulates group discussions and contributes to the fact that team members learn from each other, understand "other people's" tasks

  • the experience of past assessments helps the next time and we can speed up the process while reducing the error

Planning Poker, also known as Planning Poker, Scrum Poker or simply Estimation Cards, is one of the most popular tools used for team assessment of tasks and work planning in the format of relative estimates (Relative estimation). To start using maps, the team needs to choose the granularity of the grading scale and determine what will be the smallest reference task for them, which they will assign, for example, "1", and what will be an example of a task that is too large to take into work and requires a breakdown on subtasks.

When choosing an assessment, you should take into account 3 factors influencing the result: the scope of the task, the complexity of the task and the risks. There are tasks that are very simple, but of a large volume, and sometimes, on the contrary, they are very complex, but in fact this is one line of code or the subject of a mailing list letter.

The deck consists of 50 cards. Designed for 5 people.
5 mini decks of 10 cards from 1/2 to 20, TFB *, NFC **.
Thick paper with lamination.
* TFB = Too Frighteningly Big
** NFC = No Faintest Clue
green.png

Pros of using Estimation Cards (planning poker)

When using the techniques of relative estimates, remember that we are not chasing an overly accurate estimate of a single task, but are trying to empirically improve the predictability of delivery times and team throughput. If the team cannot come to an agreement for a very long time, it is probably not worth the risk trying to somehow evaluate the "incomprehensible", but create a separate task on research and already having the results in hand - repeat the procedure at the next assessment session (on planning a sprint or refining a backlog )

Instruction from Simplesense.

1. Each team member takes a mini deck of cards with numbers

2. In the process of discussing a task, the question arises of assessing its volume / timing / complexity. Team members ask clarifying questions and proceed to the assessment phase.

3. Each participant in his own way estimates the labor / time, etc., based on his own understanding and chooses the estimate that he considers necessary, puts the card with the estimate face down. None of the team members can see each other's grades, which makes it possible to evaluate tasks as independently as possible.

  • ½ - means that the task is very easy and the assessor will easily cope with it in a couple of minutes. Further, the score grows according to the complexity of the problem.
    If the task is very large, the participant puts in a TFB card - Too Frighteningly Big.

  • In the case when the participant has no idea how to solve this problem, he puts an NFC card - No Faintest Clue.

4. After the assessments are open for general review, discussion begins and a search for a compromise, if necessary. Someone gave an assessment without taking into account any nuances, while someone has already performed such tasks 100 times. First of all, they ask to explain their grades of those who gave the minimum and maximum grades. After discussion, the problem is again assessed by the participants. A successful outcome is when the whole team is agreed.