What is the best way to handle user stories that exceed your team's capacity or velocity?

When dealing with user stories that exceed your team's capacity, break them down into smaller, manageable tasks. Break down functionalities, identify key components and prioritize. For example, separate frontend and backend work, focus on core features and handle different sub functionalities separately. By dividing the workload, team can maintain a sustainable pace, meet deadlines and deliver incremental value to users without feeling overwhelmed.

Shouldn't the question be here, why the team is taking a Requirement (user story) in the Sprint if it is exceeding their capacity or velocity? Is it being forced upon the team? Shouldn't this be identified much earlier, probably in a backlog refinement session?

by: Prioritization Slice User Stories Minimum Viable Product (MVP) Negotiate Scope Parallelization Dependency Management Temporary Team Expansion Reassess Velocity Retrospective Analysis Educate Stakeholders Buffer or Slack Time Continuous Improvement

We can try different options like :- Scope Negotiation with PO to see if scope of stories can be adjusted without compromising on essential functionality Consider moving story to a future sprint if it does not compromise with the current sprint goal Skill Enhancement- Assess gaps within team that if addressed can improve efficiency Review DoD- Ensure DoD is clear and realistic Limit WIP- Enforce WIP Limits to prevent team from taking too much work at once. Continuous Improvement:- Identify bottle necks,process issues or areas of improvement and take corrective actions Bring to Management Attention- If the situation persists, highlight to management on additional assets (people)

🚀 Embracing project success in Agile, particularly Scrum, boosts team spirit and productivity. I'd start by recognizing each team member's unique contributions, making them feel valued. In retrospectives, celebrate not just the outcomes but the journey and learning. Publicly acknowledging the team's achievements in meetings or emails lifts morale. Planning team outings or fun activities strengthens bonds. Emphasize the growth and learning from the project to encourage a culture of continuous improvement. Lastly, celebrate customer satisfaction – a testament to the team's hard work and commitment. These celebrations drive motivation and unity. 🎉👨💻👩💻

The replies so far have all been great ideas that I would have tried. Here´s the best first step. The question does not say who you are. But I would first approach the Product Owner, since it is they that prioritise the product backlog. In addition they have a large say in the human resources available (or at least agree after input from the specialist team). If they cannot or will not change the above, the previous replies are all a great way forward.

Facing such phase when you realized that the current velocity might get exhausted if complete user story is targeted then the first thing to look at is interdependent tasks. Team should have a quick sync including Product Owner for tasks prioritization and heads-up for tasks breakdown. Later the team can analyze dependent gaps and eliminate them from the current sprint and by doing this the independent tasks can be finalized and turned into independent short User Stories!

One option is to split it into smallest stories. Other option is to re-discuss the story, to have a new refinement session within the team in order to find the best suitable technical solution to satisfy the vision and to fulfill the goal.

user stories should be carefully split ed , when splitting user stories, it's essential to maintain the value delivered to the user in each smaller story. Each split should ideally result in a deliverable product increment. Regular collaboration and communication with the product owner, development team, and other stakeholders are crucial to ensure that the split stories align with the overall project goals and priorities.

Splitting User Story definitely can help in keeping the size within the team capacity. Use sessions such as backlog refinement to discuss with the team on the best way to split the User Story. Be careful not to split it too small as it might introduce unwanted problems such as being too isolated and adding administrative effort

Deferring User Story should be done together as a team and stakeholders need to be informed. This could be applied to low priority User Story (whether it's originally low or become lower over time). Utilize your ticket management tool such as Jira or ADO to keep track on deferred User Story. Whenever the team is ready, it could be pulled back to the active Sprint

We need to consider multiple aspects before we defer the story.. 1. Business value of the story and priority. 2. If the story has external dependencies. 3. If it's an enabler story. 4. If the story is tech debt. We need to use tagging extensively to identify such stories which have external dependencies or are tech debt stories which can be deferred easily if the team is overloaded.

I’m curious why user stories aren’t primarily coming from the users? This appears to be an exercise to define work by just altering the format to a new ”different” way of writing the work.

Continuous revisiting of story priorities and estimate is important. Priorities of stories may change overtime as we progress in the project. Based on the priority and value addition, stories can be deferred to another sprint. And yes, deferring a story does not mean ignoring it. It should still be part of all discussions and closely tracked.

Deferring a user story means postponing its implementation to a later time. This can happen for various reasons, such as changes in priorities, dependencies on other features, or a need for more information.Here are common ways to defer a user story. 1. Prioritization 2. Dependency on External Factors 3. Insufficient Information 4. Resource Constraints 5. Change in Business Priorities 6. User Feedback or Testing Outcomes When deferring a user story, it's crucial to communicate this decision transparently to the relevant stakeholders, especially the product owner and the development team. It helps manage expectations and allows for better planning and prioritization in subsequent iterations.

To manage user stories beyond team capacity, consider deferring them to a future sprint or release. This is suitable for non-urgent, less critical, or currently infeasible stories, especially those reliant on external factors like regulatory changes or market conditions. While deferring, continuously monitor and reassess their priority and details. Ensure clear communication with users and stakeholders about why the story is deferred and its implications.

If the decision for the team is to defer the story there need to be many factors that have been considered such as: downstream impacts, dependencies and ROI/Business Value. If the product can still function but not to it's ultimate potential deferring the user story may not be the best decision. After understanding all of the factors that come with deferring a user story, and the team makes the decision to defer it the roadmap would need to be updated. There would also need to be communication with the stakeholders explaining why it was deferred and what is being implemented in its place. Communication is key.

As per my views: 1. Continuous reassess story priorities and estimates, acknowledging that they may evolve over the project's course. 2. Based on changing priorities and value, stories can be deferred to subsequent sprints without neglecting them. 3. Even if a story is deferred, it remains an integral part of discussions and is closely monitored. 4. Assess multiple factors before deferring a story, including business value, priority, external dependencies, whether it's an enabler story, and if it involves technical debt. 5. Utilize tagging extensively to categorize stories with external dependencies or those related to technical debt. This aids in identifying stories that can be deferred if the team is overloaded.

After checking the priority of the story only we should defer it, may be we can defer some other work item based on priority

Best way to handle user stories that exceed planned sprint capacity would be to 1) start a dialog with stakeholders to understand the priority, 2) negotiate scope of story and acceptance criteria, 3) align the new story in the backlog to be pulled in next sprint depending on priority and 4) keep it in mind to pull it in current sprint if capacity becomes available during the sprint.

I negotiate with my team when we have a story that is too big. We look at the sprint and determine value, discuss if it will cause context switching or added stress to complete the sprint if we add it. We also look to see if it can be broken down to in the sprint to show progress. Once the team decides, I let the stakeholders know and provide what went into the decision from the team. If we didn't put it in the current sprint, then we discuss how it can be a priority for the next sprint.

The best way to handle user stories which exceed the team's capacity is to break down user stories by negotiating with the stakeholders. 1. Take the user story to stakeholders and explain the situation of not being able to accommodate the story in the current sprint 2. Lay down definition of done along with all the acceptance criteria segregated by user personas. 3. Negotiate the trade off of various acceptance criteria and try to break down the user stories. 4. Once it reaches a win-win situation break the user story and move them in current and consecutive sprints.

"For example, you may negotiate the scope, quality, time, or cost of the user story. You may also negotiate the acceptance criteria, the definition of done, or the minimum viable product." First, let's not say you can negotiate quality. If you've negotiated quality then the user story is in fact not done. A completed user story should always represent a tested change to the system. The same concern applies to the definition of done, which should never become more or less lenient from user story to user story. You can't negotiate time because the length of the sprint is fixed, and cost is determined by scope. So, the only thing you should really be negotiating is user story scope, which is covered by section 1 above.

1. As per my views, to manage overcapacity in User Stories, for addressing the user stories exceeding sprint capacity: a. Engage stakeholders to understand priority. b. Negotiate story scope and acceptance criteria. c. Align the story in the backlog for the next sprint based on priority. d. Be ready to pull it into the current sprint if capacity allows. 2. Negotiating User Stories: Negotiation involves discussions, primarily between developers and product owners, to ensure a shared understanding of requirements, estimate effort, and make necessary trade-offs & before the negotiation meeting, ensure everyone reviews the user story and acceptance criteria & developers should be familiar with technical aspects, challenges, and dependencies

Negotiating a user story often involves discussions between team members, particularly developers and product owners, to ensure a shared understanding of the requirements, estimate effort, and make trade-offs if necessary. Here's a step-by-step guide on how to negotiate a user story: Preparation: Before the negotiation meeting, ensure that everyone involved has reviewed the user story and its acceptance criteria. Developers should be familiar with the technical aspects, potential challenges, and dependencies. Clarify Requirements: Discuss and clarify any ambiguities or uncertainties in the user story requirements. This may involve seeking additional information from the product owner or stakeholders.

To address user stories exceeding team capacity, negotiate with users and stakeholders. Find a balance between user needs and team limits by adjusting scope, quality, time, cost, acceptance criteria, and definition of done, or minimum viable product. Aim for a mutual agreement that delivers value without overburdening the team.

In my experience negotiation with stakeholders works best when you have a user story that exceeds capacity. A term I always use is "short term wins for long term gains." If you can successfully deliver a smaller but very functional portion of the product then you will buy yourself time to deliver the larger product at a later date.

Many a times, we get stories, with a huge flow of execution, having a lot of applications talking to one another, and all of those have to be in sync in order to work, as well there are a lot of UI validations to consider. We can complete the main flow of execution and keep the other UI level validation in smaller other user stories. This will remove the overhead from that one big user story and divide among smaller user cases.

I find this option the most useful one. We need to verify if we have capacity and then the priority and then the urgency of putting that part of the functionality over other

Consider a user story about developing a payment feature for an e-commerce platform. The initial story might state, "As a user, I want to make payments easily." While the intention is clear, it lacks specificity and leaves room for ambiguity. Encourage the author to refine it by specifying details like preferred payment methods, security measures, and any specific user interfaces involved. A well-formed revision could be, "As a user, I want to securely make payments using credit cards, PayPal, and other major methods, with a streamlined checkout process featuring real-time transaction updates." This clarity ensures a more effective development process, allowing teams to precisely understand and implement the user's needs.

Rejecting a user story should be done tactfully and with clear communication. Understand the Story:Ensure you fully understand the user story and the reasons behind its inclusion. Document Reasons:Clearly document the reasons for rejection. This could include technical constraints,conflicting priorities,or lack of clarity. Communicate Clearly:Discuss your concerns with the relevant stakeholders or product owner. Offer Alternatives:If possible, suggest alternative solutions or compromises that might address the underlying needs without fully rejecting the user story. Collaborate:Work collaboratively with the team to find the best way forward. Sometimes,a rejected user story can be revisited with adjustments.

Rejecting a user story should only be considered after all other options have been discussed within the team and with the stakeholders. Rejecting a user story because of capacity is not a valid response when determining work effort. The only time a user story should be rejected is if it will cause major impacts or duplication of work. Even in that case, there needs to be lengthy discussions within the team to determine possible solutions to the problem. If the ROI for work within the team doesn't make business sense then it is acceptable to reject the story. As with any situation where work wont be completed communication is required with the stakeholders.

All the examples for reasons to reject a user story given here has nothing to do with a story exceeding the teams capacity. Silly AI.

Usually user stories should be written as a collaboration of users that will need to use that requirement. By describing what they want to be able to execute after the implementation is done. But in reality what usually happen is developers are writing the user stories based on requirements that are poor described without any sense of ownership and commit about what to expect at the end. The frustration starts to happen because what as been described was not what was intended and the fault if the agile process. Going back to the User stories… software features to serve the users need to be written by the users and be presented to the users and collect feedback to improve or evolve for another use cases.

Lets start with understanding the value of the story which will impact the business', and then prioritizing the story in the sprint. Sometimes the story seems simple but has a lot of work, in that case understand the entire workflow for the story and then if needed split the story and break it into chunks of work. Later get the estimation for each chunks and then as per team velocity run the sprint. It is important to understand the need of the story before making any decisions. It may leads to win-win condition for team and stakeholder.

Stretch Targets- accept the story as a stretch target whereby all stakeholders understand that this story may not get accomplished. Such stories should not be considered in the team KPIs (predictability, etc). In the event any committed story encounters an impediment, this stretched story can be picked up in the sprint.

In some cases, the team might have overestimated the story points for that particular user story. Reestimate the story points during the next refinement by reviewing the acceptance criteria amongst the team members. Breaking down the story could be another way to do so.

Split, defer, negociate, reject, ... these are just outcome of the given situation: you (the team) are asked to deliver something that surpasses the normal pace, so a sprint if we take velocity as a reference. What matters is to discuss and attempt to understand why this piece of product (user story) is so "big" to the team. Is it because of its uncertainty, the productivity of the team, the vision of product management, a mix of these ? Embrace the puzzle without much of built-in belief is in my opinion best you should do.

First prioritize the all stories and compensate the high priority story with low priority story if possible and move low priority stories to next sprint.

Throw out all the stories, come back with a desired state or outcome, and collaborate with developers to come up with ideas that can't be used to achieve the outcome for a reasonable investment. Be prepared to experiment with multiple ideas until the outcome is achieved. Impact Mapping can help this process, and lead you away from a feature factory / build trap mentality.

Do the feature storming and analyze if there is any creative way. If this is not helpful then discuss with all stakeholders transprently to prioritize user stories based on value and critically which should be good enough with the capacity/velocity.

Challenge the self-resilient team with the desired outcome for the user story and come up with the plan. They may choose any of the above mentioned such as split, defer, negotiate, Reject or combination of these or even come up with creative way to solve this with all the stakeholders involvement or they will stretch a bit with the help of all the team members with proper collaboration and achieve the desired outcome.