Organization and prioritization are two distinct activities that can be used to improve the quality of a product backlog. A simple linear list is difficult to prioritize. As well, many stakeholders are forgotten in the rush to deliver customer value. See example list of stakeholders. The purpose of this game is to expand the view of multiple stakeholders as well as illuminate the value of organizing the work without prioritizing.

Learning Points

● The value of organizing before prioritizing

Timing

45 minutes. (Variant: drop a round to shorten)

Ingredients

The game consists of the following items for each participating team:

1. Persona Cards: (5”x8” cards) There are four persona cards or sheets. Each persona should be copied to a separate card.
2. Story Cards: (3”x5” cards) In this game, the stories consist of a verb and a noun (e.g Fertilize Crops). There are 18 cards, but more cards can be added. One verb noun grouping should be copied to each card.
3. Category Cards: (3”x5” blank cards – use different colour than story cards) – The category cards are initially blank. A set of blank cards are needed for each round and team. Typically there are around 5 Categories per round.
4. Black Marker: Any pen or felt tip mark should work. This is used for writing on the category cards. One timer is needed in order to time each round and the debrief sessions.

Recipe

1. Introduction (5 min)
   • Draw simple Product Backlog in Scrum
   • Ask participants what it is
   • Comment that there is a lot of complexity that may not be best represented by asingle sorted list.
2. Form the group into teams – each at a table. (2 min) 4 seems a good number for a team. More than this and it is hard to jointly sort the cards. 5 may be OK.
3. Introduce the domain. Once upon a time, there was a farm and different people had different ideas how the farm should be run. (MORE)
4. Iterate! There are 4 rounds – each with a different persona (see table below)
   • Shuffle story cards between rounds
   • Introduce Persona (1 min + 1 min for questions)
   • Ask participant organize the backlog based on the persona.
   • Debrief the round. Do this in a circle. See debrief questions below.
5. Debrief the whole game.

Round 1

• Persona: Producer/Farmer
• Round Duration: 5′
• Debrief*: 4′

Round 2

• Persona: Customer/Buyer
• Round Duration: 4′
• Debrief*: 3′

Round 3

• Persona: Farm Bureau/Inspectors
• Round Duration: 4′
• Debrief*: 3′

Round 4

• Persona: Land Owner
• Round Duration: 3′
• Debrief*: 10′ – whole game

* Larger groups may require more debrief time.

Debrief Questions

First Round

• Each team: talk a little about how you organized the backlog.
• What is the same/different?
• What else did you notice?
• If no one mentions, may notice that we are used so used to prioritizing we often go there automatically. Did any of the teams create a structure that helps them understand their world?

Second/Third

• Same questions as first plus
• What was different from earlier round(s)?

Final

• Over all 4 rounds, what have you noticed about backlog organization?
• How does this relate to product backlogs that you work with?
• How well do real world product backlogs represent different stakeholders?

Story Cards

There are 18 story cards. Each story card consists of a verb and noun pair.

(Note: Michael S removed story numbers since it may confuse people)

Stories:

• Fertilize Crops
• Spray Insecticide
• Harvest Crop
• Buy Seed
• Rotate Crops
• Weed Fields
• Survey Market
• Kill Groundhogs
• Lay Fallow
• Define Market Needs
• Till The Ground
• Assure Organic (inspect for selected crops)
• Plant Seed
• Sell Early Summer Crops
• Sell Late Summer Crops
• Water Plants
• Recover from Natural Disaster
• Forecast Profit

Personas

Producer / Farmer

As a farmer, I’m focused on legally maximizing my profits by controlling costs, buying the right seeds, planning crop rotations, reducing pests, and timing the release of my products to markets. I follow closely the agreements set forth in the lease with the Land Owner.

Consumer / Buyer

As a customer of the local farm, I want healthy and reasonably priced food that has been grown with sustainable and environmentally friendly practices.

Land Owner

The farm land has been in my family for over 200 years. My family’s income depends on the revenue generated from the farm lease. Hence, we are interested in ensuring the long-term sustainability of the land. As a family, we have been engaged in wildlife preservation and conservation of natural resources. It is imperative our property used in accordance with all relevant laws and regulations.

Farm Bureau / Inspectors / Regulatory Agencies

As a regulatory body, we are tasked with ensuring that produce is safe and fit for human consumption. We test and verify that the land is used in accordance with local, state, and federal regulation to protect from erosion, run off, soil depletion and other activities that may harm the land. We enforce all animal protection laws and regulations.

FAQ

There are no story points (cost). How does this make any sense?

The whole point of the game is to ignore prioritization. Story cost is only relevant for making prioritization decisions. In this game we want people to think about stakeholders and how to organize the work in terms of who cares about what.

Credits

This game was developed at Deep Agile 2010 in Boston by:

• Michael Sahota
• Mary Gorman
• Warren Elliott
• Greg Ott
• Dan Zaino
• Judy Rivais

Mike having an awesome time in Boston

Just under a week back home and I finally have the chance to write about the most amazing time at the first Agile Games Conference in Boston. The conference was hosted by Agile Bazaar, a dedicated  and leading edge Agile group in the Boston Area.

I had the pleasure of meeting a phenomenal group of experienced, Agile coaches, practitioners, fellow speakers and in addition those who were completely new to Agile. I thank everyone I met for your spirit and enthusiasm for the event and the topic of Agile Games.

The highlights (in no particular order):

• The realization that there are a lot more people than I thought who are interested or expert at working with games and experiential learning for Agile
• I was able to run some new games on retrospectives and estimation (I will be posting in the weeks to follow).
• New games were developed by attendees of the conference (I also hope will be posted here in the weeks to come).

New Games Created at Deep Agile

The creation of new games by conference attendees was pretty wicked. As we were planning the conference I saw the opportunity to run a games design session prior to the open space program on the second say. I thought I might inspire or perhaps cajole a few people into trying to use the open space format to build and run a new game. To my delight, three new games were created that day and two were run. Both were totally the product and inspiration of the people who created them. I simply explained how Don and I create games: the process we apply, the principles we follow and the things that inspire us. It really is not as hard as you might think and this was the point we wanted to make.

The Backlog is in the Eye of the Beholder

Michael Sahota championed one of the games that emerged from this exercise, “The Backlog is in the Eye of the Beholder”. This powerful game demonstrates the importance of identifying and leveraging different views to better manage a  product backlog. I really look forward to trying this one myself. Again , I hope to post how to execute this game in the near future. Below is a picture of the whole team, Michael is third from the left. I will add the rest of the names soon. If you see yourself, send me note and I’ll update the post with your name.

Team that created the Backlog is in the Eye of the Beholder at Deep Agile

Playing Backlog is in the eye of the Beholder

Plumb Crazy

John Martin along with his teammate David Hallowell, championed another excellent game “Plumb Crazy”. This clever game demonstrates the challenges that can emerge when individuals feel they are making progress but the team is not really delivering value. I look forward to using this one too. Again, I do hope to have this one published later this summer. Below is a picture of John(left)  and David (right).

John and David, creators of Plumb Crazy

And here is a group playing the game!

Playing Plumb Crazy... that's hackerchick far right!

Diverse and Dedicated Experiential Games People

As I mentioned earlier, it was great for me to be surrounded by people who take games and experiential learning seriously. I find tremendous value in these techniques and it reassuring to know I am not the only one who thinks so. A thank you to Tobias Mayer, Lyssa Adkins, Portia Tung and my good buddy Don McGreal for being an inspiration to me. Thanks also to Brian Bozutto and Michael de la Mazza for actually conceiving of a conference focused on Agile games and having the courage and dedication to make it happen.

Some New Games Coming

I will soon post the new games that I did at the conference. One is a contextual game to set the stage for retrospectives called “Balloon Madness”. I will also post the retrospective approaches I introduced as well as some I learned including the poetic and now popular “Liked, Lacked, Longed for”. By the way, that was from a nice lady from South Carolina, second from the left in the picture of the “Backlog is in the Eye of the Beholder” team. I also spoke with Francois Bachmann many times through the conference . Francois has a deep interest in retrospectives and showed me a really unique set of cards to help drive more effective retrospectives.

The other game that I ran was the Domino Effect which is a game that illustrates the impact on software development when timelines are arbitrarily shortened. The point demonstrated is that software is not like painting walls and the technical debt that is accumulated by rushing can not be accommodated with simply extending the timeline.

More to Come

But I need some sleep.

Posted by Michael McCullough

10 minutes

This games gives people a great understanding of what Technical Debt is and why it is so costly to projects.

Ingredients:

• 4 cardboard boxes. Size: around the standard size of a moving box (13”x18”x12”)
• Enough packing peanuts to fill two of the boxes
• 2 people (these folks are the key ingredient ;-p). You can do this exercise with more people (adding 2 at a time, up to 6 people without the need to have more boxes or packing peanuts). For even more people you’ll need to add more boxes and packing peanuts

Recipe:

This games gives people a great understanding of Technical Debt and why it is so costly to projects.

The goal is to move packing peanuts from one box to another one across the room.

The objective is to demonstrate how technical debt is created and why it is so costly.

Setup:

• Set 2 lanes across the room
• For each lane place one cardboard box (opened for easy access) at each end of the lane. Thus you have two boxes per lane
• Fill the boxes at the same end of the lanes with packing peanuts: one of them at 70% capacity, and the other one at 90% capacity
• Each participant will stand next to a box with packing peanuts

Execute:

1. Explain the participants their goal: To transfer all the peanuts from the box next to them to the box at the other end of their respective lanes. Observing:
   • The person with the 70%-full box is to transfer all of them in three trips and can use hands and arms (and support them on his/her belly if so desired), but nothing else
   • The person with the 90%-full box can take as many trips as desired and can use both hands only
   • The boxes are not to be lifted, tilted, shifted or other. Their sole purpose is to contain the peanuts
   • Peanuts that fall on the floor are left there
   • There is no time limit
   • Do not run and watch your step
2. Start the game
3. Let them play for about 2 minutes or until one of them accomplishes the task

Results:

1. Unless something really unexpected happens, the person with the 90%-full box will finish first or will have transferred more peanuts once the time is up
2. The person with the 70%-full box typically drops way more peanuts to the floor
3. The person with the 70%-full box exerts and stresses more

Learning Points:

• The peanuts on the floor are technical debt: they represent features or aspects of features, and those on the floor represent unfinished work, bugs, etc. All of them very costly to the project
• One trip represents a release cycle: more peanuts per trip represent a bigger release
• Big monolithic projects generate more technical debt
• Big monolithic projects take more energy out of people, and stress them more
• Trying to bring all features from start to end at once is way more difficult
• Bringing features to completion in small chunks is easier, and generates less technical debt (less peanuts on the floor)
• Bringing features to completion in small chunks allows people to work at a better pace and under less stress
• Bringing features to completion in small chunks results in more features done in less time

This post was submitted by Masa K Maeda.

Timing:

1 Hr.

Ingredients:

• Teams: 1 or more of 5 to 6 people
• Color paper: 4 different colors (20 pages or each color per team)
• Glue sticks: 2 per team
• Scissors: 2 pairs per team
• Envelopes: 2 different sizes or colors (20 of each per team)
• Color pencils: 1 set per team
• Masking tape: 1 per team
• Post-its: 3 different colors per team
• Misc stickers (optional)

Recipe:

This is a game to understand some of the mechanics of Kanban such as balancing the work-in-progress, resource allocation, and waste management. Each team has to create its own Kanban board as they see fit and improve it as the game develops.

The objective is to create paper pamphlets to promote a vacation resort. Each pamphlet will have some drawn and some pasted artwork in addition to written information.Note: each paper and envelope has to pass through the entire production line and each person can do only one thing at a time (e.g. a person cannot be writing on a pamphlet and passing envelopes at the same time). One story per pamphlet, meaning it has to be broken into smaller tasks (think epic=pamphlet).

1. Each team will have:
   • Paper: 3 different colors (you keep the 4^th color paper for later)
   • 1 glue-stick (you keep the other one for later)
   • 1 pair of scissors (you keep the other one for later)
   • 1 kind of envelope (you keep the other one for later)
   • Color pencils
   • Stickers (optional)
   • Duct tape
2. Explain the roles and responsibilities:
1. Header: writes company name and campaign name
2. Cutter: cuts the artwork (sun, palm tree, flying bird, boat)
3. Artist: draws the ocean line, the beach, and pastes the papercuts
4. QA guy: verifies all is correct (all pamphlets must be similar)
5. Folder/sender: folds pamphlet, puts it in envelope, writes customer name/address and puts on a stack for sending.
6. Manager: manages the kanban board
3. Before starting:
• Make sure all teams have their material available and roles assigned.
4. Explain the game:
• They must create pamphlets, one at a time
• Pamphlet, envelope, and paper cuts must be of different colors
• All pamphlets must look the same
• All envelopes and paper must start at the beginning of the production line
• Nobody can do more than 1 thing at a time. (e.g. either I pass a sheet of paper to the next person or draw the beach but cannot be drawing and passing papers at the same time)
• They must have periodic stand up meetings to improve the process.
5. The game:
1. Give them 5 minutes to define and create their Kanban board on a wall
2. Give them 2 minutes to get set
3. Start!
4. Each 6 minutes stop them so that each team has its own 2-minute stand-up meeting
5. For iteration 3 ask the managers to expedite the creation of 2 pamphlets of different color with different artwork (palm tree, 2 boats and one diamond-shaped kite)
6. For iteration 4 change ask managers to use the other kind/color of envelope.
7. For iteration 6 change team sizes (merging 2 into one or breaking one team to integrate into other 2. This is even better if the teams end up being of different sizes)
8. Let them play for 2 more iterations
6. Post-game discussion

Learning Points:

• Collaboration is key to success
• Some aspects that require changes on WIP are very obvious while others are subtle
• Roles and responsibilities continuously change (titles lose importance)
• Response to variability is highly effective
• Lack of iterations make the work smooth and efficient
• Regular discussions to improve process are key
• It scales because daily stand up duration does not depend on the # of people in the team

This post was submitted by Masa K Maeda.

About 5 minutes per round. I typically like to run three or four rounds depending upon how quickly my class “gets it”.

Ingredients:

• Two people willing to play
• (Optional) Play money

Recipe:

I first was exposed to this game at a Toastmaster meeting. The facilitator only carried the example to the first round and made the point of cooperation. I’ve enhanced the game to make points about iteration retrospectives, specialization, and scaling.

The central activity in this exercise is a game of “Thumb Wars”. This is the same game you played as a child, in which the object is to pin your opponent (partner’s) thumb to their fist.

YouTube has many videos of this activity. A good example can be found here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=l649Ftx-0hM

When you run the game, some groups will figure out the messaging and techniques more quickly than others. Sometimes they never get it and you may have to walk them through it. Either way, it is very instructional and illustrates many lean and agile values.

GamePlay:

Demonstration: Ask the audience if they know how to play thumb wars. This question leads individuals to fond memories, anticipation and excitement. Then invite a member of the class to the front and demonstrate the game.
Ask people in class to pair off and tell them you will pay the person with the most wins a dollar for each win. (I have play money for this purpose)
Instruct that they will have a minute to play the game. Tell them that the object of the exercise is to “maximize gain”. Give them the “ready, set … go” and time them for about a minute.
Round 1 (Competition): In the first round of this game, the class typically thumbs it out. In round one, it is normal that I “pay out” four to six dollars to the person with the most wins. To conclude the round, I revisit the goal of maximizing gain, then ask players to discuss this with their partner for a while, then give them the “ready, set … go”.
Round 2 (Cooperation): Round two is usually characterized by a couple agreeing to cooperate and exchange wins. This works just like it sounds. Person A lets Person B win, then the reverse, and so on for the minute. I generally pay out about $30 per person to the winning team because, since they alternate, they tie in wins. The debrief includes a discussion about the value of cooperation over competition when people share the same goal. I once again remind the team that the goal is to “maximize gain”, give them another minute to discuss it and then “ready, set … go”
Round 3 (Specialization): Some members of the class will realize that an individual does not have to “win” to gain. The two people enter into a partnership in which Person A passively lays their thumb down onto their fist and Person B repeatedly taps it. I usually pay out about $120 to $180 to person A at the end of this round and they split the money per agreement. (if people can actually count that fast). The debrief discussion focuses on the value of role specialization and creativity in achieving gain. Sometimes we give the discussion a “lean” twist and talk about the waste associated with exchanging thumb positions in Round 2. We discuss again the goal of maximizing gain, do a brief retrospective, then “ready, set, … go”.
Round 4 (Scaling): Once again, some members of the class will realize that the instructions were “a dollar per pin” and “maximize gain”. Nothing was said about the number of playing fields. So some teams will realize that they can apply the knowledge gained from round 3 with both hands. Person A taps the thumb of person B with both their right and left thumbs and again as fast as possible, person A gets paid, then they split the money. But, by this time in the game, people cannot count the number of “wins”, so we give up on money. But everyone understands that the number is nearing $200 – $300 per person.

After I’ve debriefed Round 4, then we have a discussion of the value of retrospectives in increasing gain from about $6 to about $300.

Learning Points:

• Collaboration and cooperation maximizes gain over competition in groups with shared goals. (Competitive situations exist between functional groups in the waterfall process)
• Process retrospectives pay big dividends
• There are many different ways to improve a process. Creativity can lead to more efficient ways to cooperate, specialize and scale. If you can achieve such fantastic results ($6 -> $300) with this silly game, think what you can do with a complex software development project.
• This whole game, from end to end, can be presented as an exercise in value stream mapping and waste elimination if the facilitator wishes to take that approach.

This post was submitted by skillen.

15 minutes

Ingredients:

• Copies of the twelve principles of agile software (http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html)
• White-boards and/or flip-charts
• Markers

Recipe:
This is an exercise that we came up with to better communicate the twelve principles behind the Agile Manifesto. In their existing form, it is challenging for people to read and understand each principle and, just as importantly, to easily refer to them later.

• Divide participants in to groups, each with a white-board or flip-chart and markers.
• Have the teams write down the numbers 1 through 12.
• Challenge each team to, within a 15 minute time-box, come up with three words maximum that effectively capture each of the twelve principles.
• To avoid ‘analysis paralysis’, make sure to give the teams time updates throughout (e.g. 10, 5, 2, 1 minute warnings). You will find that teams will speed up towards the end.
• When time is up, go through each principle and discuss which are the most important words. Sometimes I like to ask people what their most and least favorite principles are.
• Post the condensed principles somewhere visible, so as to make it a regular talking point.

Here is an example:

1. Produce Value Early
2. Welcome Change
3. Iterative Delivery
4. Daily Business Collaboration
5. Trust Motivated Team
6. Face to Face
7. Working Software
8. Sustainable Pace
9. Technical Excellence
10. K.I.S.S.
11. Self-Organize
12. Reflect and Adjust

Learning Points:

• This is an effective way of capturing each principle in a much more concise and memorable way.
• Probably the most valuable part of this exercise, is in the discussion that the teams have when trying to come up with the words. They need to first understand the principle before breaking it down.
• Teams can establish a collective understanding and ownership of each principle.
• This also makes for a good review exercise in a classroom environment.

This post was submitted by Don McGreal.

We discuss the application of games, some of our favourites and the history behind the name TastyCupcakes.

Give it a listen, we hope you enjoy it!

15-20 minutes

Ingredients:

Each table (with 5-6 students) has a plastic shoe-box containing enough supplies for 20 pinwheels (would need less most likely). Make sure that you make samples of what the pinwheels are supposed to look like for each group. HOWEVER, make sure that the sample pinwheels are not in the shoebox at first. The students should not even know they exist. Here’s the supplies in each box.

1. Straws
2. Paper fasteners
3. Paper copies of the pinwheel pattern to cut out
4. Scissors
5. Markers
6. Paper punch
7. Shoe-box size plastic containers (to hold the supplies at each table)

Recipe:

This is conducted in two rounds, with three slides (two slides in round 1, and one additional slide for round 2).

Round 1

Slide 1

Your job is to create as many pinwheels as you can in 5 minutes. Take a minute, and assign the following roles at each table:

• Cutter – owns the scissors and completes the cutting
• Decorator/Designer – owns the markers and creates the design for the pinwheel
• Hole Puncher & Paper Fastener – owns the hole puncher and the paper fasteners
• Folder – does any necessary manipulation or folding of the paper during the creation of the pinwheel
• Tester – tests the pinwheel when it has been finished. Verify that it has been decorated and that it at least moves a little when someone blows.
• Manager – responsible for telling each team member what to do. The manager will communicate the tasks to the team members. The team members are not allowed to see the instructions.

Slide 2

• At your table there is a box. Each box contains the instructions and the supplies.
• No one is allowed to step outside their role.
• The manager is the only one that can speak, by instructing the team members. Each team member is only allowed to speak to the manager.
• If the pinwheel fails testing, the tester must hand the pinwheel back to who they think caused the “bug”.

At this point, the teams DO NOT see the sample. They don’t even know a sample exists

Now, start the timer. After 5 minutes, they will likely create 0 pinwheels.

Round 2

Slide 1

• Manager, you are now a servant leader. Please do whatever it takes to help the team.
• Team members are allowed to help others out.
• You can cross role boundaries.
• Everyone can read the instructions. You can use the instructions as a guideline, but you can now be creative in how you create the pinwheels.
• First, take 2 minutes to discuss how you will work together to be more efficient. Then, you will have 5 minutes to create as many pinwheels as possible.

Here, the team goes through a time-boxed planning session of 2 minutes to figure out how to best make the pinwheels before the 5 minute pin-wheel making session. I also pull out the sample pinwheel, so the team can have a collective understanding of what the “vision” is.

During this second round, the teams made between 5-10 pinwheels. The ones who made less had issues with the “servant leader” concept, which made for a great discussion afterwords.

This is a bit of a pain in the butt to set up, but in the end, it is WELL worth it, and now I have the supplies for many classes to come!

Learning Points:

This exercise illustrates the following points.

• Cross functional team work
• Self organizing teams are more effective than those teams under a command-and-control regime
• Team members must be able to cross functional silos to be the most efficient
• Managers are the most effective when they are serving the team, not telling the team what to do
• Over-specialization causes bottle-necks (you’ll notice that some functions will be far ahead of others, such as the “cutters”, and others will be far behind, such as the designers)
• It’s important for the team to take time to retrospect and plan together

It is up to you whether you discuss after each round what was experienced. I only had the discussion at the end, and compared and contrasted the ways of working. I plan on introducing lean concepts in subsequent sessions, such as “eliminate waste”. The “cutters” tended to stack the papers and cut out lots of patterns, which introduced a lot of waste in the end, as the hole punchers, folders and designers couldn’t keep up. I may add a round 3 to illustrate this.

pinwheel_instructions_and_cutout.zip (93 KB)

This post was submitted by Andre Simones.