In Scenario 1, examination on the team’s performance over the first two sprints will be done through a burndown chart. This will involve assessment of story point progress and analysis of ideal vs. real velocities. The calculation of ideal burndown line was done by dividing the initial 158 story points by the total number of workdays across five sprints, making adjustments for two public holidays. This set the expected daily velocity at approximately 3.29 points per day, this set a record for tracking performance.
Delays due to rework on PBI-2 in sprint 1 slowed progress and a real burndown line below the ideal trajectory. The efficiency of the team in Sprint 2 improved completing PBIs 6 to 12. The team quickly resolved a testing issue with PBI-9 allowing them to maintain a pace closer to the ideal line. This improvement depicts that the team can meet project timelines with continued focus but more effort is required to stay aligned with the ideal trajectory. Figure 1 shows the team’s progression, challenges, and improvements over these sprints.
Scenario 2: Quality Assurance and Acceptance Criteria Analysis
Scenario 2 puts focus on the team’s quality assurance (QA) practices. specifically analyzing Acceptance Criteria (ACs) and sprint tasks ensures Definition of Done (DoD) is well met. The practices offer guidance on development for PBI-4 by being specific on customer requirements for product size selection.
Addressing this requires the AC revision to add additional size options and testing requirements in each of the sessions. Additional refinement of sprint tasks to include cross-browser compatibility testing and device consistency was done to provide a complete QA scope.
Scenario 3: Product Backlog Analysis
This scenario involved the analysis of the product backlog to ensure accuracy in estimating the effort and Definition of Done (DoD) adherence. Review of each PBI is done for confirmation of unique identifiers, accurate prioritization, and appropriate assignment of high, medium, and low priorities
Re-evaluation of effort estimation was done for each PBI in aligning with task complexity which ensures there is consistency in story points. The review of DoD was done to confirm correct assignments. This is because some complex PBIs needed more comprehensive testing but were not classified correctly under a less rigorous DoD. These adjustments made a guarantee that all tasks receive the necessary quality checks.
User stories were also refined by the team to ensure clarity and functionality across devices. User stories were adjusted to be more specific. This is was purposely done to assist in aligning functional requirements with customer expectations which ensures that product features are well-defined and achievable.
Video script 1
Introduction
I hope you are all fine. Today I will make analysis on our team’s performance over the first two sprints using a burndown chart.
Ideal Burndown Explanation
We will start with the ideal burndown chart. This will serve as our baseline for tracking progress over the project. The ideal burndown line provides a visual benchmark for the purpose of monitoring team progress.
The initial 158 story points were distributed across the five planned sprints. In order to reach completion by the end of Sprint 5, reducing the story points from 158 down to zero is essential. The ideal trajectory allows for visualization and target of our efforts.
Calculating of the ideal line involves calculation of daily velocity. We divide our total story points, 158, by the total number of effective working days available across all sprints so as to get the daily target. This calculation requires excluding weekends and public holidays will be excluded as those days no work is done. In this case the days 27 September and 5 November occurring during Sprints 1 and 4, respectively will not be accounted for. which.
Excluding the weekends and those specific holidays means that only 48 effective workdays will be available across the five sprints. Using our initial story points (158) by these 48 workdays our expected daily velocity will be approximately 3.29 story points per day.
On the burndown chart, this ideal line is steady giving the team a clear visual of the target pace and allows measurement of the actual performance against this optimal progress. The team can aim to match or stay close to this line by ensuring they work efficiently to meet project deadlines.
Real Burndown and Progress in Sprints 1 and 2
Now as we look at our real burndown line showing how the team performed in comparison to our ideal trajectory, we see it captures the day-by-day reduction in story points on basis of actual task completions and highlights met, exceeded, or fell short of the target progress.
In Sprint 1, the team tackled several high-priority Product Backlog Items (PBIs), including PBIs 1 through 5, which were to be completed within this sprint. The team made steady progress was made with PBI-1 and PBI-2 being completed in the first week. However, as all tasks related to PBI-4 were completed by the middle of the second week issues with the functionality of PBI-2 were found which needed immediate attention and rework. This slowed the work pace
This rework on PBI-2 slowed progress resulting in inability to maintain our ideal velocity of around 3.29 story points per day. This lag in the real burndown depicted the progress of the team being slower than anticipated.
In Sprint 2, the team adjusted the workflow to improve efficiency and reduce delays. Completion of PBIs 6 to 12 was the main focus for Sprint 2. Consistent progress was made through streamlining collaboration and maintenance of a better pace. As the team reached halfway through the sprint some issues in PBI-9 were discovered. Quick action to resolve the issues limited any major impact on the overall sprint timeline. However, the worked the remaining tasks with a high pace as shown in the real burndown chart
Performance Analysis and Conclusion
As we conclude, we will look at the velocity calculations. Due to some unplanned rework the real velocity was slightly lower than the ideal for sprint 1. In contrast the performance aligned closely with the ideal in Sprint 2. Maintaining or improving this velocity in future sprints, will likely allow us complete the project on time.
Thank you. This concludes the burndown chart and performance analysis for Sprints 1 and 2
