• Sizing board (a whiteboard or flip-chart or the like; divided into 5 columns: XS, S, M, L, XL)
• Timer
• A set of prepared stories
• A set of 5 X 3 cards
• Tape for attaching the cards to the board

Recipe:

Have the team stand-up in a half circle facing their sizing board.

Shuffle a deck of story cards and place them face down on a table in front of the sizing board. Place a timer next to the cards.

The game begins when the facilitator starts the timer, which is the signal for the first member to perform the following steps:

• pick the top card off the deck
• attach a piece of tape to the card
• read the story on the card out loud
• assigns the card to one of the five columns on the board (XS, S, M, L. XL)
• provide a reason to the group
• start the timer for the next player

It is important assigning the card to one of the five columns has to be the player’s own decision, without any external interference. This is why the player should provide the reason for his or her decision after the card has been assigned. If the player does not assign the card within one minute, the card will be assigned to the column in the middle. The player then restarts the timer for the next player.

After sizing the card, the player presents his or her reason. The reason may be based on expert knowledge, from past experiences, or observations from other projects. It is essential that the rest of the team observes and listens carefully to understand the overall context and development of the board. All other team members are therefore silent without discussions or judgment.

After a few rounds, there should be enough cards on the board to give the team members the option to, on their turn, move an existing card on the board into a different column instead of picking a new card from the deck. As before, the player reads the story out loud followed by a reason which supports the decision to re-size.
Once all user story cards are on the board and sized, each team member, on their turn, can either continue moving cards between columns or simply “pass” if they are satisfied with the current results. If a player does not make a decision within the one-minute time-limit, it will be interpreted as a “pass”.

The game ends when the pile of story cards is gone and every member of the team signals “pass”.

Challenges:
The biggest challenge in the beginning is the lack of a reference story – the Chihuahua (see Doggy Planning). Because no card has been assigned yet, the first player will not have something to compare his or her story to. And since the cards will be shuffled, we won’t know if the first stories are really small, medium, or large until we uncover more stories. This is OK and and important lesson of the game. Every player will have the opportunity to change their mind in future rounds, so the important thing is to just get started. Remember, the game does not stop until all players signal “pass”.

It is quite typical that two or more players disagree about a few assignments, and the card may end up endlessly moving up and down the board. If this happens, just take the card and place it on the bottom of the deck. That way, the sizing can continue and the card should have more context after all the other cards have been sized.

Learning Points:

• Group user stories according to their relative size/effort
• Reach a democratic consensus quickly
• Ensure that each team member has a say
• Learn how user stories are captured
• Actively collaborate in a fun way

Variations

• Play with 3 (S,M.L) columns instead of 5 (XS, S, M, L. XL)
• Begin with 3 columns until the team requests more granularity, then the moderator adds additional columns
• Assign the Fibonacci sequence to the columns (1,2,3,5,8)

CREDIT: Jochen Krebs

This post was submitted by Don McGreal.

Ingredients:

• A good-sized audience – 10 or more (the bigger the better)
• Pens & paper for all

Recipe:

It is best to sneak this exercise in when it is least expected.
Start by selecting something in the room that is not easily counted or estimated. Take the time to write the exact number down and hide it from the audience.
Then, have each individual quickly and privately write down their own estimate.
Gather all of the estimates and calculate the average.
Cross your fingers and unveil the number that you wrote down earlier. It should be relatively close to the group average.

I have done similar exercises about a dozen or so times and the results are usually spot on. However, there is always a chance that the results could be off, so always make sure to start by announcing that you want to perform an experiment together. Participants will understand if the results are not perfect.

Some things you can use to estimate:

• Your weight – although people tend to be generous and the estimates are usually low.
• Number of books available on Amazon.com
• Number of words on a page – I’ve had the most success with this one. In a class environment, I’ll use the lab write-up and have the students write their estimate on the back.
• Number of steps it takes to walk from one side of the room to the other – this one is fun, but you could get accused of rigging the outcome.
• Balloons in the room – only works if you played the 99 Test Balloons game earlier.
• Please leave a comment to share some of your ideas and experiences.

Other helpful hints:

• To keep things quick, open a spread sheet to type in everybody’s estimate as they show them to you. This also makes it easy to calculate the average in front of everybody.
• Analyze the data with the class. You will likely get a very wide variance. I often find that no one individual estimate is as close as the average. This speaks to the true wisdom of the crowd and of the importance of diversity.
• To make it even more interesting, give a prize to whomever had the most accurate estimate.

Learning Points:

• The accuracy of the group estimate is usually stronger than any one individual’s.
• The larger and more diverse the crowd is, the better the estimate.
• Agile embraces this principle by involving the whole team in estimating and planning and by encouraging the creation of cross-functional teams.

This post was submitted by Don McGreal.

Ingredients:

• 1 set of planning poker cards per participant.
• http://www.crisp.se/planningpoker/

Directions:

Participants in an estimation meeting are each given a set of cards. Each card contains an estimate. Units used vary, they can be days, ideal days, story points, etc. The cards are numbered to account for the fact that the longer an estimate is, the more uncertainty it contains (e.g 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20, 40). When an item (feature, task, etc.) is presented, without mentioning numbers, a discussion takes place to clarify assumptions and risks.
Each participant then lays a card face down representing their estimate. Simultaneously, the cards are turned over. If all estimates are relatively close, then there is no more discussion needed, the estimate is recorded and the group moves on to the next item. If some participants had high or low estimates, then they are given a chance to justify their estimate as they may have been thinking of something others were not aware of. Repeat the estimation process until a consensus is reached.

Learning Points:

• The wisdom of crowds is more accurate than individual estimates.
• Using the cards avoids the influence of others while estimating.
• It encourages all team members to participate
• Discourages the talkative members from dominating (too soon anyway).

CREDIT: James Grenning

Posted by Mike

Ingredients:

• Map with driving directions from Dallas, Texas to Anchorage, Alaska (4000 miles)

Directions:

Each team needs to get to Anchorage to surprise their true love, who is working there. They must create a plan: timeline, what to bring, budget, etc.
Have each team present their plan. Look for over planning (hotel reservations for each night, where to eat, etc.) and under planning (no passport, no miles per day goal, etc.). Ask the teams what they would do if they found out half-way through the trip that their true love has just been transferred 2000 miles away in another direction.

Learning Points:

• The ROI on detailed planning isn’t always there. It is near impossible to predict and to plan for every stop, every meal, every incident encountered on a road trip. But we can prepare for one day at a time, and inspect and adapt as we go.
• Correlate the change in plans with software development and how when the customers needs change, we must be able to adapt. This is in contrast to continuing on with the initial plan which may no longer be of any use to the customer (shelved software).

Posted by Mike

Ingredients:

• Many coins of varying denominations

Directions:

A customer wants to hire the subcontracting vendor who provides the quickest estimate to sorting a bag of coins. Have teams of participants bid on the project by shouting out bids (in seconds). Let all the teams attempt the exercise and hold them to their bids by timing them. After they have finished, point out that what the customer actually wanted, was to have the coins sorted by date, not denomination.

Learning Points:

• Timelines are often set without due diligence.
• Assumptions are often made without involving the customer. These assumptions may hold true all the way to production.
• If a team had first sorted a sample of coins and demonstrated for feedback, the problem would have been caught before it became too costly.

Posted by Mike

Ingredients:

• 1 set of planning poker cards per participant. http://www.crisp.se/planningpoker/

Directions:

One at a time, show each of the following dog names and have participants vote by showing an estimate card:

• Chihuahua – this is the smallest dog and should be the reference estimate. Others should be sized relative to it.
• Great Dane – estimates should be very large
• Golden Retriever – estimates should be medium or large
• Poodle – participants should ask for more information, e.g., is it a standard poodle or a toy poodle?
• Newfoundland – this is a lesser known dog; those who don’t know what it is should not vote and should instead ask questions
• Austrian Guildenbaur – this is a trick; the dog does not exist, so no estimates should be given

Learning Points:

• This exercise should get participants familiar with using the planning cards.
• Estimators should not be influenced by others.
• Topics are sized relative to each other, using Nebulous Units of Time.
• People should not vote on topics that are not understood. They should ask for clarification or if it is not in their domain, they should abstain.

Posted by Don McGreal