Skip to main content

Velocity Calculus - The mathematical study of the changing software development effort by a team

In the practice of Scrum many people appear to have their favorite method of calculating the team's velocity. For many, this exercise appears very academic. Yet when you get three people and ask them you will invariability get more answers than you have belly-buttons.

Velocity—the rate of change in the position of an object; a vector quantity, with both magnitude and direction.
“Calculus is the mathematical study of change.” — Donald Latorre 

This pamphlet describes the method I use to teach beginning teams this one very important Scrum concept via a photo journal simulation.

Some of the basic reasons many teams are "doing it wrong"... (from my comment on Doc Norton's FB question: Hey social media friends, I am curious to hear about dysfunctions on agile teams related to use of velocity. What have you seen?

  • mgmt not understanding purpose of Velocity empirical measure;
  • teams using some bogus statistical manipulation called an average without the understanding of the constrains that an average is valid within;
  • SM allowing teams to carry over stories and get credit for multiple sprints within one measurement (lack of understanding of empirical);
  • pressure to give "credit" for effort but zero results - culture dynamic viscous feedback loop;
  • lack of understanding of the virtuous cycle that can be built with empirical measurement and understanding of trends;
  • no action to embrace the virtuous benefits of a measure-respond-adapt model (specifically story slicing to appropriate size)
... there's 6 - but saving the best for last:
  • breaking the basic tenants of the scrum estimation model - allow me to expand for those who have already condemned me for violating written (or suggesting unwritten) dogma...
    • a PBL item has a "size" before being Ready (a gate action) for planning;
    • the team adjusts the PBL item size any/ever time they touch the item and learn more about it (like at planning/grooming);
    • each item is sized based on effort/etc. from NOW (or start of sprint - a point in time) to DONE (never on past sunk cost effort);
    • empirical evidence and updated estimates are a good way to plan;
  • therefore carryover stories are resized before being brought into the next sprint - also reprioritized - and crying over spilt milk or lost effort credit is not allowed in baseball (or sprint planning)

Day 1 - Sprint Planning
A simulated sprint plan with four stories is developed. The team forecast they will do 26 points in this sprint.

Day 2
The team really gets to work.

Day 3
Little progress is visible, concern starts to show.

Day 4
Do you feel the sprint progress starting to slide out of control?

Day 5
About one half of the schedule is spent, but only one story is done.

Day 6
The team has started work on all four stories, will this amount of ‘WIP’ come back to hurt them?

Day 7
Although two stories are now done, the time box is quickly expiring.

Day 8
The team is mired in the largest story.

Day 9
The output of the sprint is quite fuzzy. What will be done for the demo, what do we do with the partially completed work?

Day 10
The Sprint Demo day. Three stories done (A, B, & D) get demoed to the PO and accepted.

Close the Sprint
Calculate the Velocity - a simple arithmetic sum.

Story C is resized given its known state and the effort to get it from here to done. 

What is done with the unfinished story? It goes back into the backlog and is ordered and resized.

Backlog grooming (refinement) is done to prepare for the next sprint planning session.

Trophies of accomplishments help motivation and release planning. Yesterday’s weather (pattern) predicts the next sprints velocity.

Sprint 2 Begins with Sprint Planning
Day 1
Three stories are selected by the team.  Including the resized (now 8 points) story C.

Day 2
Work begins on yet another sprint.

Day 3
Work progresses on story tasks.

The cycles of days repeats and the next sprint completes.

Close Sprint 2
Calculate the Velocity - a simple arithmetic sum.

In an alternative world we may do more complex calculus. But will it lead us to better predictability?

In this alternative world one wishes to receive partial credit for work attempted.  Yet the story was resized based upon the known state and getting it to done.

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. — Leonardo di Vinci 

Now let’s move from the empirical world of measurement and into the realm of lies.

Simply graphing the empirical results and using the human eye & mind to predict is more accurate than many peoples math.

Velocity is an optimistic measure. An early objective is to have a predictable team.

Velocity may be a good predictor of release duration. Yet it is always an optimistic predictor.

Variance Graphed: Pessimistic projection (red line) & optimistic projection (green line) of release duration.

While in the realm of fabrication of information — let’s better describe the summary average with it’s variance.

Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.

In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.

Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    To Do
    Work In P…

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?

Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

What belongs on the Task Board?

I wonder about these questions a lot - what types of task belong on the task board?  Does every task have to belong to a Story?  Are some tasks just too small?  Are some tasks too obvious?  Obviously some task are too larger, but when should it be decomposed?  How will we know a task is too large?

I answer these questions with a question.  What about a task board motivates us to get work done?  The answer is: T.A.S.K.S. to DONE!

Inherent in the acronym TASKS is the point of all tasks, to get to done.  That is the measure of if the task is the right size.  Does it motivate us to get the work done?  (see notes on Dan Pink's book: Drive - The surprising Truth about what motivates us) If we are forgetting to do some class of task then putting it on the board will help us remember.  If we think some small task is being done by someone else, then putting it on the board will validate that someone else is actually doing it.  If a task is obvious, then putting it on the board will take vi…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.

I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.


Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…