I love this chart. It's very typical of a good chart we start a little slowly as we shed other tasks, bear down into the work, get interrupted by other things and push to finish.
In this chart you can see that we started very typically and then a task that looked easy turned out to be heinously hard. I think we ended up halting this sprint and building a new one.
One problem with burndowns is that changes in scope are mixed in with progress against scope.
In your example 2, a possible explanation is... holy smoke, I probably shouldn't have waited until the end of the iteration to start this risky story/task... it's alot more effort than I expected!
In example 3, you may have added scope early or discovered that work is more effort than expected (e.g. task is estimated at 4 hours one day, then 4 hours the next after 8 hours of work and discovery that the task is much harder).
I prefer burn-ups to burn-downs for this reason... it disassociates the scope changes from the progress into two lines - one scope and one remaining work, so you can see the impact of scope change more clearly.
My view is not to take burndown charts too seriously. They are an indicator. In the end it is about if you completed a story or not.
Are you having effective retrospectives at the end of your sprints ?
Are retrospective actions followed up on ?
If you find that people don't write unit tests religiously make them do it ( if that is your team standard). Agree on a common definition of done and stick to it. See definition of done
Having an agile process like SCRUM needs constant inspection and adapting.
To me it looks like there are problems but your team is not addressing those problems. If the product owner is less than ideal, issues related to this should come up in your retrospectives so you can avoid it in the next sprint.
if you have epics you can always break them down, re-prioritise and re-plan them.
It's the "we made better than expected progress on our first tasks, then thought were were ahead, slacked off, then had to push hard catch up at the end or risk slipping a feature."
Lesson learned: Burndowns are great for tracking past efforts, but aren't necessarily representative of your future progress.
发布评论
评论（6）
这在我们的办公室里被认为是“啊，糟糕！我忘了这一点。” 烧掉：
This is recognized around our office as the "Ah, crap! I forgot about that." burndown:
模式 2 的消极面是“没有估计得太好”。
这是我使用过的一些燃尽图。 忽略背景图片——它们只是为了娱乐我的同事，与我们的工作无关。
替代文本 http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/ photos/techtalkgallery/images/16157/425x285.aspx
我喜欢这张图表。 这是典型的良好图表，我们开始时会稍微缓慢一些，因为我们会放弃其他任务，全力投入工作，被其他事情打断并努力完成。
替代文本 http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/ photos/techtalkgallery/images/16155/425x262.aspx
在这张图表中，我们开始非常稳定，然后开始实际提前完成。
替代文本 http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/ photos/techtalkgallery/images/16156/425x264.aspx
在此图表中，您可以看到我们一开始非常典型，然后看似简单的任务结果却异常困难。 我认为我们最终停止了这个冲刺并建立了一个新的冲刺。
Pattern 2 on the negative side is "didn't estimate too well".
Here are some burndown charts I've used. Ignore the background pictures - they are there just to entertain the people I work with and have nothing to do with our work otherwise.
alt text http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/photos/techtalkgallery/images/16157/425x285.aspx
I love this chart. It's very typical of a good chart we start a little slowly as we shed other tasks, bear down into the work, get interrupted by other things and push to finish.
alt text http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/photos/techtalkgallery/images/16155/425x262.aspx
In this chart we started very steadily and then took off actually finished ahead of time.
alt text http://www.atalasoft.com/cs/photos/techtalkgallery/images/16156/425x264.aspx
In this chart you can see that we started very typically and then a task that looked easy turned out to be heinously hard. I think we ended up halting this sprint and building a new one.
燃尽图的一个问题是范围的变化与范围的进展混在一起。
在你的例子2中，一个可能的解释是......天哪，我可能不应该等到迭代结束才开始这个冒险的故事/任务......这比我预期的要多得多！
在示例 3 中，您可能提前增加了范围，或者发现工作比预期的要费力（例如，任务预计一天需要 4 小时，然后在工作 8 小时后第二天需要 4 小时，并发现任务要困难得多）。
出于这个原因，我更喜欢燃尽而不是燃尽……它将范围变更与进度分离为两行 - 一条范围和一条剩余工作，因此您可以更清楚地看到范围变更的影响。
One problem with burndowns is that changes in scope are mixed in with progress against scope.
In your example 2, a possible explanation is... holy smoke, I probably shouldn't have waited until the end of the iteration to start this risky story/task... it's alot more effort than I expected!
In example 3, you may have added scope early or discovered that work is more effort than expected (e.g. task is estimated at 4 hours one day, then 4 hours the next after 8 hours of work and discovery that the task is much harder).
I prefer burn-ups to burn-downs for this reason... it disassociates the scope changes from the progress into two lines - one scope and one remaining work, so you can see the impact of scope change more clearly.
我的观点是不要太认真地对待燃尽图。 它们是一个指标。 归根结底是关于你是否完成了一个故事。
您在冲刺结束时是否进行了有效的回顾？
是否采取了追溯行动？
如果您发现人们不认真编写单元测试，请让他们这样做（如果这是您的团队标准）。
就“完成”的共同定义达成一致并坚持下去。 请参阅完成的定义
拥有像 SCRUM 这样的敏捷流程需要不断检查和调整。
在我看来，似乎存在问题，但您的团队没有解决这些问题。 如果产品负责人不太理想，那么与此相关的问题应该在您的回顾中出现，以便您可以在下一个冲刺中避免它。
如果你有史诗，你可以随时将它们分解，重新确定优先级并重新规划它们。
My view is not to take burndown charts too seriously. They are an indicator. In the end it is about if you completed a story or not.
Are you having effective retrospectives at the end of your sprints ?
Are retrospective actions followed up on ?
If you find that people don't write unit tests religiously make them do it ( if that is your team standard).
Agree on a common definition of done and stick to it. See definition of done
Having an agile process like SCRUM needs constant inspection and adapting.
To me it looks like there are problems but your team is not addressing those problems. If the product owner is less than ideal, issues related to this should come up in your retrospectives so you can avoid it in the next sprint.
if you have epics you can always break them down, re-prioritise and re-plan them.
这里通常是这样的：
积极：按时交货。
负面：积压项目太大或从一开始就同时启动太多积压项目。
Here it's often like that:
Positive: Delivery on time.
Negative: Too big backlog items or too many backlog items started at the same time from the beginning.
这是我在这里还没见过的一个。 这发生在我们最后一次冲刺中。
这是“我们在第一个任务上取得了比预期更好的进展，然后认为我们领先了，懈怠了，然后不得不在最后努力追赶，否则就有可能错过某个功能。”
经验教训：燃尽图非常适合跟踪过去的努力，但不一定代表您未来的进步。
Here's one I haven't seen here yet. It happened on our last sprint.
It's the "we made better than expected progress on our first tasks, then thought were were ahead, slacked off, then had to push hard catch up at the end or risk slipping a feature."
Lesson learned: Burndowns are great for tracking past efforts, but aren't necessarily representative of your future progress.