Skip to main content

Different patterns for Backlog Items

If you've followed through the series of articles on Scrum (see Using the pre-defined Scrum Process) you'll know they've covered making a Scrum project in xProcess and setting up a backlog of tasks that you can prioritise, forecast and display in Burndown or other charts. Participants on the project can access their tasks in the plan and update progress or modify estimates to complete them. But the pre-defined "Basic Scrum" process is just that - basic. It doesn't take into account the type of project you are doing with Scrum (it may not even be a software development project), nor the specifics of your company's or your team's process. With a little process engineering we can make things much more specific, and sometimes that's very useful.

The types of things you might want to consider once you're up and running with the basic process include:
  • Adding different role types if there are areas of specialisation within the team
  • Adding artifact templates for essential documents
  • Adding gateways to tasks (quality checklists)
  • Adding structure to the "Backlog Item" pattern, for example subtasks of a standard form
  • Adding different types of Backlog Item with different roles, estimates, gateways, structure and so on.
For example you might want to distinguish between a defect and an enhancement and use a slightly different structure of subtasks and roles for each. If you want both patterns to be used as backlog items you need to modify the Scrum Project pattern so that they can be added by Project Managers / Scrum Masters to Sprints and the Unscheduled Backlog.

This diagram shows the hierarchy in the Scrum Project pattern. It consists of a project, named in the pattern as "$Name$" (this string will be substituted with the name the user supplies for the project). It has a General Overheads... task and a Scrum administration... task, both of which cover background work not related to backlog items. The Backlog Item pattern appears 3 times within the project pattern: in the first sprint, Sprint 01; within the Sprint pattern (which can be instantiated within the Sprints parent task as many times as required for Sprint 02, Sprint 03, etc.); and within the Unscheduled Backlog task. In order to add additional or alternative patterns, all 3 of these locations will need to be modified slightly so that the new patterns appear in place of, or additional to, the Backlog Item pattern.

Here's the situation after adding 2 new patterns for Defect and Enhancement as alternatives to the general Backlog Item. This will give the Project Manager a choice of the types of backlog item she wants to make in each case.

One word of confession here: to add extra pattern shortcuts like this means that the composite task that contains them (Sprint 01 for example) must be a selection composite rather than a collection composite. In version Basic Scrum 2.9.0 they are collections so you either need to change this or, to save hassle, use version 2.9.0a or later of the process (if this is not yet available for download, email to get it.)

Next we'll look at adding structure, artifacts and gateways to our new patterns. Or check out the next article in the Using Scrum series: Participating in the Project.


Popular posts from this blog

Does your Definition of Done allow known defects?

Is it just me or do you also find it odd that some teams have clauses like this in their definition of done (DoD)?
... the Story will contain defects of level 3 severity or less only ... Of course they don't mean you have to put minor bugs in your code - that really would be mad - but it does mean you can sign the Story off as "Done"if the bugs you discover in it are only minor (like spelling mistakes, graphical misalignment, faults with easy workarounds, etc.). I saw DoDs like this some time ago and was seriously puzzled by the madness of it. I was reminded of it again at a meet-up discussion recently - it's clearly a practice that's not uncommon.

Let's look at the consequences of this policy. 

Potentially for every User Story that is signed off as "Done" there could be several additional Defect Stories (of low priority) that will be created. It's possible that finishing a Story (with no additional user requirements) will result in an increase in…

"Plan of Intent" and "Plan of Record"

Ron Lichty is well known in the Software Engineering community on the West Coast as a practitioner, as a seasoned project manager of many successful ventures and in a number of SIGs and conferences in which he is active. In spite of knowing Ron by correspondence over a long period of time it was only at JavaOne this year that we finally got together and I'm very glad we did.

Ron wrote to me after our meeting:

I told a number of people later at JavaOne, and even later that evening at the Software Engineering Management SIG, about xProcess. It really looks good. A question came up: It's a common technique in large organizations to keep a "Plan of Intent" and a "Plan of Record" - to have two project plans, one for the business partners and boss, one you actually execute to. Any support for that in xProcess?

Good question! Here's my reply...

There is support in xProcess for an arbitrary number of target levels through what we call (in the process definitions) P…

Understanding Cost of Delay and its Use in Kanban

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a vital concept to understand in product development. It should be a guide to the ordering of work items, even if - as is often the case - estimating it quantitatively may be difficult or even impossible. Analysing Cost of Delay (even if done qualitatively) is important because it focuses on the business value of work items and how that value changes over time. An understanding of Cost of Delay is essential if you want to maximise the flow of value to your customers.

Don Reinertsen in his book Flow [1] has shown that, if you want to deliver the maximum business value with a given size team, you give the highest priority, not to the most valuable work items in your "pool of ideas," not even to the most urgent items (those whose business value decays at the fastest rate), nor to your smallest items. Rather you should prioritise those items with the highest value of urgency (or CoD) divided by the time taken to implement them. Reinertsen called this appro…