What are the most common mistakes made during sprint planning?

There is a process to create Sprint Goals: First, the Product Owner points to the team’s Product Goal and introduces the business objective of the new Sprint. Based on that information, the Scrum Team then collaboratively creates the Sprint Goal, considering, for example: · Who is available during the Sprint? · Are new team members joining the Scrum Team, or are current team members leaving? · What is the required quality level as defined in the Definition of Done? · Is the Scrum Team familiar with the necessary technology, or are they lacking skills? · Does the Scrum Team have any particular governance requirements? · Does the Scrum Team have to support daily operations? Creating the Sprint Goal is a collective team matter.

Having too many goals in a sprint can lead to problems, indicating a lack of proper planning, such as a quarterly roadmap. It can result in the team working on too many things, difficulties in communication with stakeholders, and challenges in collecting feedback. To avoid this, each sprint planning should be aligned with the broader product goals, such as the quarterly goals.

One of the fundamental principles of Agile development is setting a clear sprint goal during the sprint meeting plan we found most of the challenges will be mentioned below . -Lack of Accountability This is one of the major issues we found when there's no defined goal. -Scope Creep One of the challenges is when the scope of requirements is not adequately defined. Lack of Focus team members may work on tasks that are not aligned with the sprint purpose. -Dedicated team or Confusion Team members may have different interpretations of what they should be working on during the sprint

Quick tips about sprint goals: -While defining sprint goal, the team needs to align with company strategies, to do that we need scaling approaches -business owner and POs needs to work together to define a sprint goal -To follow just sprint goal is not enough, teams need to follow the quarterly goals like product goal or PI objectives or OKRs

Too often planning aims to deliver a list of items as a set of outputs rather than focus the sprint on a single outcome. This results in the classic iron triangle; the length of the sprint defines the fixed time, the sprint backlog defines the fixed scope and the size of the team defines the fixed cost. Planning is the opportunity for the team to determine what they can do in the sprint to deliver an outcome that delivers the value the Product Owner is aiming for, or to be realistic if the outcome is too ambitious for a single sprint.

According to me, the one common mistake in Sprint Planning is to Include stories with dependencies. Based on experience, 90% of the time the story has spilled. Its better to include story with no dependency.

Sprint planning is only as effective as the work done before the planning session by the Product Owner. If the backlog is not groomed properly then the Sprint backlog will not be groomed properly. I would also say that most teams don't use sprint goals as a measure of success. When a team doesn't understand the why behind the work, they tend to not make it a priority or the opposite and hyper-focus on one specific thing. The biggest issue that I have seen to date is that most teams don't operate in a true Scrum fashion. Companies impose deadlines that don't align with Sprints and have unrealistic expectations of what can be delivered via Agile.

The two biggest contributors to missing the Sprint Goal at the end of the Sprint is caused by issues that take place during Sprint Planning. First one is being overly optimistic about how much the team/team member can get done in a Sprint. That is why it is so important to know your team velocity. Second is not having good capacity planning. This should include trainings, team members that have to go to conferences, etc... You must know your vacation schedule, especially for globally distributed teams. Third is not leaving space for your known amount of mid-sprint work. You should have a rough idea of how many points the team gets by added work during the sprint and be able to plan to absorb it.

Scrum Masters or Program Managers can plan a sprint efficiently and effectively right when one sprint ends and other starts but often there are several mistakes made summarised as follows: 1. Incorrect estimation of story points per user stories 2. Developers unable assess dependent user stories and adding it later to sprint. For example, FE user story added to the sprint but later on realised it won't add incremental value to the sprint until BE user story is developed. 3. Team should throw a light on retrospective of earlier sprint or previous project while doing sprint planning which often gets missed 4. Sprint goals are often unclear to the team and unrealistic targets are picked without adding buffer

During sprint planning, the crucial step is defining a clear and realistic sprint goal aligned with the product vision and stakeholder expectations. This succinct goal keeps the team focused and prevents misplaced priorities. Collaborate with the product owner and stakeholders to set this compass before selecting backlog items.

Most of the times with teams it happens that, the Sprint goal is directly dictated or decided by Product Owner without having any room for discussion or negotiation. The Sprint goal is to be crafted by the entire Scrum Team and the Scrum Master should ensure that the developers are equally involved in crafting the sprint goal along with product owner. Even if its crafted by the product owner alone, then the developers must agree with the sprint goal before finalizing it and them committing to it to say the least.

That is the commitment piece. People never commit to their hearts to something they did not agree to, have no saying to or disagree with. It's honestly just good business to involve everybody, especially the people who will do the work. It even helps to elevate the stance of team members, into taking ownership over what they say they will do and honor that. It's such a win-win that it feels funny we still have to mention that. That being said, power play can exist within the team and a great team coach or facilitator helps all the voices to reach equal contribution and ideas to be fairly judged.

Sprint planning is a team activity and not governed by 1 person. It's a team activity planned and delivered by a team. Collaboration and joint commitment is the key

Mistake: Disregarding the input and concerns of the development team during planning. Solution: Collaboration is key. Listen to the team's input, ask for their estimates, and take their expertise into account when planning.

Engaging the entire team in sprint planning is vital. It's not just the product owner and scrum master's task; it's a collective effort. Each team member's input is a valuable asset – it helps identify dependencies, estimate effort, and promote self-organization. To avoid this mistake, ensure everyone has a voice and role in planning. Use tools and techniques to enhance communication and participation. Collaboration breeds success.

💡 I'm currently running an experiment with the intent to validate an assumption I have about LinkedIn's Community Top Voice badge. Are you curious about the results of the experiment? All you need to do are 2 steps: 1️⃣ Like this message 2️⃣ Follow me I will publish the results soon. Stay tuned! 🤗

There are no Hierarchy in Scrum - Every team member are equal from Scrum Master, Product Owner and Developers. The Scrum team must self-organize to make Scrum framework effective and not be dictated by Product Owner or Scrum Master. The scrum team must be made transparent on the work to be done, especially in Sprint Planning so that they can inspect and adapt. Not involving the whole Scrum team in Sprint Planning, transparency cannot be established and Scrum's bottom-up, intelligence can not occur.The team should discuss lack of team involvement in Sprint Planning during Sprint Retrospective with focus openness and courage (part of Scrum value) and identify improvements in the next Sprint to avoid this problem.

Sprint Planning is a team sport, and everyone needs to be on the field. When key players are left out, insights are missed, and commitments may not reflect the collective understanding. Involve the whole team – developers, testers, designers – to ensure diverse perspectives and a comprehensive plan. Team involvement builds a sense of ownership and accountability.

When team members are excluded, it can lead to misunderstandings and hinder collaboration. Ensure that everyone has a role and voice in planning. Use techniques like round-robin or Fist of Five to gather input and foster collaboration. This way, the team can collectively commit to the sprint goal and deliver effectively.

The deconstruction of a backlog item should not just result in smaller more manageable chunks, but in DELIVERABLE chunks. Breaking a large chunk of work into 5 chunks of work that all have to be delivered at the same time is to have not broken it down at all. Think about what the increments might look like. Maybe you want a product search page. What if you first deliver a basic http form that returns a simple list in a tabular format. You can quickly learn about what people search for, how the database responds, and how images impact load time. Then maybe add in some better formatting. Then maybe add in a json call for the search. Then maybe add in pagination. Then filters. Then ... You get the idea.

Breaking down work into bite-sized chunks allows the team to make progress during the course of the sprint and push value to customers. When user stories are large, they can become something that gets passed from sprint to sprint with no tangible progress being made.

Big tasks are intimidating. Failing to break down work into manageable chunks can lead to uncertainty and delays. Each task should be a digestible piece that everyone can understand. Breaking down work not only aids in estimating better but also ensures a smoother workflow throughout the sprint.

Avoid the pitfall of tackling large, complex backlog items during sprint planning. Break work into manageable chunks using techniques like user stories, acceptance criteria, and tasks. Small units enable better tracking, issue resolution, and incremental value delivery. Keep it simple and focused for sprint success.

Not breaking down work into bite-sized chunks of value risks work not getting done within a sprint, which will further demoralize a team.

Breaking down work into manageable chunks is crucial for effective sprint planning, it ensures clear focus, efficient progress tracking, and timely issue resolution. Failing to do so can lead to confusion and delays.

On top of understanding capacity, make sure you're aware of everything that consumes capacity. Defects are a great example - they're sometimes not pointed (depending on the organization) and, even if they are pointed, a lot of them aren't predictable - but defect fixing/retesting consumes capacity. There is no silver bullet for this - but if you don't at least take capacity consuming activities into account, you may end up overcommitting and not being able to meet your sprint goals.

The capacity of the team really boils down to what the team feels they can successfully deliver in terms of a sprint goal, bearing in moist that the team are expected to commit to the sprint goal, not a sprint backlog. Anything numeric, such as velocity might be an aspect you might consider but the ultimate decision comes down to the team. It should not be “we have velocity of 40 points, so you will bring in 40 points worth of stories and that is what you are going to commit to”! Ask the team, they determine their capacity,

In my experience, not considering a true look at team capacity is a big mistake. My teams see user stories using the CURE acronym. Unforeseen complexity and risk can add a great deal of work to the scope of a story, especially as more dependencies and moving pieces are involved It’s important to leave some wiggle room when estimating.

This and more. To make it explicit: capacity is not about what the team can do, but about what they can do in a period of time. Certain things have a time to expire or time to live and the capacity dedicated to this must be realistic to the constraints, in this case, dates. Other constraints could be what comes next in the roadmap that might need to trump things. Most teams lack visibility into that and therefore consider sprint-per-sprint capacity and effort, which is only part of the story. Capacity planning goes beyond what teams can do or see and involve negotiation at stakeholder level and stakeholders with their development/producing teams.

Scrum framework is designed to address complex problems and the Scrum team should account for complexity i.e. unforeseen dependencies, issues and risks. The Scrum team should estimate capacity to address for these risks in the Sprint planning. Historical data may or maybe be relevant due to complexity. Use of story points is very common in Scrum, however it's not mandatory as it's a tools & technique. Having a high level description of a sprint goal and clear Definition of Done will help Scrum team to transparently estimate capacity and have alignment with sprint goal.

Overloading the sprint with more work than the team can handle is a recipe for burnout. Not considering the team's capacity leads to unrealistic expectations and potential bottlenecks. Understand the team's velocity and factor in potential disruptions. A balanced workload ensures sustainable progress and a happier, more productive team.

💡 I'm currently running an experiment with the intent to validate an assumption I have about LinkedIn's Community Top Voice badge. Are you curious about the results of the experiment? All you need to do are 2 steps: 1️⃣ Like this message 2️⃣ Follow me I will publish the results soon. Stay tuned! 🤗

Capacity is not solely determined by a team's capabilities but rather by what they can realistically accomplish within a given timeframe. For example, when dealing with time-sensitive tasks or projects with set deadlines, the allocated capacity must align with these time constraints. Other factors to consider include the priority of upcoming tasks on the roadmap. Many teams tend to focus on sprint-to-sprint capacity and effort without considering the broader context. However, effective capacity planning involves a more comprehensive approach that includes negotiation with stakeholders. It's about aligning stakeholder expectations and the capabilities of development or production teams to ensure successful outcomes.

In agile, flexibility is key. One common mistake is treating sprint planning as a rigid contract, resisting changes during the sprint. Always encourage teams to embrace change. Use daily scrums to discuss adjustments, sprint reviews to gather feedback, and retrospectives to reflect on processes. This adaptability leads to better outcomes and customer satisfaction.

One I don't see mentioned here: plan for scenarios and options. Out of a planning session you come with a set of possibilities already thought and talked about. While you can't know everything that can happen, you can know what to do in most general aspects: - what happens if we are not done THIS by mid sprint? - What ix EXPERT PERSON gets sick the whole sprint? - What is TECHNOLOGY THINGY is too complicated? You don't need secondary plans for everything, but for the most critical, interdependent and dangerous. Problems leave clues!

Flexibility is a must in Sprint Planning. Failing to leave room for changes or unexpected challenges can throw off the entire plan. The development landscape is dynamic, and plans may need to pivot. A rigid approach can hinder adaptability. Plan, but also embrace the possibility of change.

💡 I'm currently running an experiment with the intent to validate an assumption I have about LinkedIn's Community Top Voice badge. Are you curious about the results of the experiment? All you need to do are 2 steps: 1️⃣ Like this message 2️⃣ Follow me I will publish the results soon. Stay tuned! 🤗

Flexibility and responding to change is a key concept of Agile. Not leaving room for change negates the importance of the ability to adapt, which isn't really Agile at all.

Very often we spend a significant amount of time and try to come up with a very detailed plan. However, that is rarely a good approach. By far, we should always be cognizant of the fact that it is after all a 'plan'. And as with a plan there would be unknowns which one can never predict. At times, too much planning does not really help our cause (goal). And how much planning is enough, can vary from team to team and they own the extent needed.

Ignoring Historical Data: Ignoring past sprint performance data, such as velocity and team capacity, can lead to inaccurate estimations and overcommitment in the current sprint. Also, Micromanagement: Micromanaging team members or dictating how tasks should be done can demotivate the team and hinder their ability to self-organize effectively. Neglecting Retrospective Insights: Ignoring feedback and insights from previous sprint retrospectives can prevent the team from learning from past mistakes and improving their processes.

One of the most common mistakes during sprint planning is setting poorly defined goals. A clear objective is crucial to maintain the team’s focus. 🎯 Overloading the sprint is another common error. It’s important to avoid cramming too many tasks into a single sprint to prevent burnout and ensure quality work. 🏋️♂️ Ignoring the team’s capacity can also lead to problems. Always consider the team’s bandwidth when planning tasks to ensure they are manageable and realistic. 🧑🤝🧑 Stakeholder involvement is often overlooked during sprint planning. Their input can be invaluable for prioritizing tasks and aligning the sprint with business objectives. 👥

Planning around features and capacity instead of planning around outcomes, driven by goals. So often teams forget to emphasize on the why and focus only on what or worst only on the how

Mistake 6: Too much Estimation Dedicating too much effort towards detailed estimation takes considerable amount of the time allotted for Sprint Planning defeating the purpose of "pivot and persevere" that usually happens throughout the Sprint. Estimating User Stories in person hours or converting Story Points into person days is another case that draws too much attention towards an activity that bears little impact on positive Sprint outcomes. Leads, Product Owners and Scrum Masters dictating Estimates is another cause of lack of accountability from the team. Practically, estimation should be a collective exercise and just enough to know what is being planned to achieve the Sprint goal can be achieved in that Sprint duration.

Many a times we see there are lot of spillovers from sprint to sprint. Sprint Planning is one such critical stage where pitfalls could be avoided! 1. Ensure user stories meet the 'definition of ready' before adding them to the sprint backlog. Most of the times, they are added without proper grooming. 2. Commonly, stories lack proper preparation, with incomplete or unclear requirements. 3. Implement a checklist to assess preparedness before sprint planning meetings. 4. The goal is to always have a clear understanding of the work we commit to. 5. Ensure capacity planning is definitely accommodating scope changes to sprint goal if any.

💡 I'm currently running an experiment with the intent to validate an assumption I have about LinkedIn's Community Top Voice badge. Are you curious about the results of the experiment? All you need to do are 2 steps: 1️⃣ Like this message 2️⃣ Follow me I will publish the results soon. Stay tuned! 🤗

It's the just enough, just in time approach. Planning for 8 hours is not better than planing for 30 minutes. Its not talking more that gets a plan more refined, is talking about what matters in clear ways and courageously. Also, while heroics are not something to be encouraged, planning has to include "what will we do to solve the problem?" not simply identify what can go wrong. I see too many teams and their coaches focusing on part 1 (identify) but not enough on part 2(mitigate/solve). It's not always about some manager or director somewhere fixing things for teams. A lot of solution and insight comes from the insiders.