I've never understood the point of the points (pun intended) you can try to convince yourself they're measuring "complexity" or whatever but what they're measuring is time, so why not cut out the middleman?.
I'm not saying to estimate tasks accurately to the hour. Just rough ballparks: "I think I can do these 3 on friday". "Give me a week, it's gonna take a pile of tests to make sure we get it right". "Hmm I probably need the whole sprint for that, we don't have a clear view of the impact, it sounds like a small change but it uppends our current architecture".
These are the real discussions, the numbers are a silly abstraction on top of this and are unnecessary.
It should also be 100% expected that the estimates will be wrong. New bugs will show up, regressions will be introduced, requirements will change last minute. It should also be expected that some tasks that were supposed to get done won't be and other tasks that weren't in the planning could be snuck in. You are "Agile" are you not?
If you're not than just go back to waterfall and stop dragging the Agile Manifesto through the mud, thanks.
The entire point of the exercise is the discussion, it gives you some idea of what is likely to go well and be finished and what is a risk factor. If you're measuring "velocity" god help you.
I'm not saying to estimate tasks accurately to the hour. Just rough ballparks: "I think I can do these 3 on friday". "Give me a week, it's gonna take a pile of tests to make sure we get it right". "Hmm I probably need the whole sprint for that, we don't have a clear view of the impact, it sounds like a small change but it uppends our current architecture".
These are the real discussions, the numbers are a silly abstraction on top of this and are unnecessary.
It should also be 100% expected that the estimates will be wrong. New bugs will show up, regressions will be introduced, requirements will change last minute. It should also be expected that some tasks that were supposed to get done won't be and other tasks that weren't in the planning could be snuck in. You are "Agile" are you not?
If you're not than just go back to waterfall and stop dragging the Agile Manifesto through the mud, thanks.
The entire point of the exercise is the discussion, it gives you some idea of what is likely to go well and be finished and what is a risk factor. If you're measuring "velocity" god help you.