Prio

Feature/Theme

Title

Backlog Manager
Story Notes

Demo

Release tag

Story Pts

Status

Program Assesment
Scoring: 0 - Never, 1 - Rarely 2 - Occasionally, 3 - Often, 4 - Very Often, 5 - Always

Area / Question Product Ownership Health

Product Owner facilitates user story development, prioritization and negotiation Product Owner collaborates proactively with Product Management and other stakeholders User Stories are small, estimated, functional and vertical Product owner facilitates development of acceptance criteria which are used in planning, review and story acceptance Teams groom the backlog every sprint

Score
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.0 100%

Comments

Total Product Health Score PSI/Release Health

Team participates fully in Release Planning and Inspect and Adapt Product backlog for the PSI is itemized and prioritized Teams proactively interact with other teams on the train as necessary to resolve impediments Team participates in System Demo every two weeks, illustrating real progress towards objectives Team reliably meet 80-100% of non-stretch PSI Objecives

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.0 100%

Total PSI/Release Health Score Sprint Health

Team plans the sprint collaboratively, effectively and efficiently Team always has clear sprint goals, in support of PSI objectives, and commits to meeting them Teams apply acceptance criteria and Definition of Done to story acceptance Team has a predictable, normalized velocity which is used for estimating and planning Team regularly delivers on their sprint goals

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.0 100%

Total Sprint Health Score Team Health

Team members are self-organized, respect each other, help each other complete sprint goals, manage interdependencies and stay in-sync with each other Scrummaster attends Scrum of Scrums and interacts with RTE as appropriate Stories are iterated through the sprint with multiple define-build-test cycles (e.g. the sprint is not a waterfalled) Team holds collaborative, effective and efficient planning and daily meetings where all members participate, status is given clearly, issues are raised, obstacles are removed and information exchanged Team holds a retrospective after each sprint and makes incremental changes to continually improve its performance

2.0 2.0 2.0

2.0 2.0 10.0 40%

Total Team Health Score Technical Health

Teams actively reduce technical debt in each sprint Team has clear guidance and understanding of intentional architecture guidance, but is free and flexible enough to allow emergent design to support optimal implementation Automated acceptance tests and unit tests are part of story DoD Refactoring is always underway CI, build and test automation infrastructure is improving

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.0 100%

Total Technical Health Score

Total Project Team Score Summary Questions

110.0

88%

Page 4 of 27

Program Assesment
Scoring: 0 - Never, 1 - Rarely 2 - Occasionally, 3 - Often, 4 - Very Often, 5 - Always

Area / Question

Score

Comments

Radar Chart Data

Product Ownership Health PSI/Release Health Sprint Health Team Health Technical Health
1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0

Page 5 of 27

Team Agility Assessment Radar Chart

Product Ownership Health
1

0.75

0.5

Technical Health
0.25

PSI/Release Health

Team Health

Sprint Health

Release Cycle Assessment

Scoring: 0 - Never, 1 - Rarely 2 - Occasionally, 3 - Often, 4 - Very Often, 5 - Always

Area / Question Planning Readiness

Top ten features are prioritized ahead of time using WSJF Program backlog is ready and socialized with Product Owners and key stakeholders 1-3 weeks prior to event Product owners have team backlogs groomed and ready Vision presentation is ready and reviewed prior to event Architects are extending runway by identifying upcoming architectural features, socialized with teams prior to event, update domain model RTE has prepared and announced events, agenda, attendance, venue, access provisions, specialty events, continuing education, as appropriate

Score
2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 15.0 50%

Comments

Total Planning Readiness Score Release Planning Event

Event has effective facilities and distributed team communications Program stakeholders, business owners, and shared resources are in attendance All team members participate, in person or remotely Business context, Product vision, and Top 10 features are effectively communicated Timeboxes are adhered to; event starts and ends on time Risks are discussed, addressed categorized Management addresses key scope and quality challenges and makes adjustments as necessary Alignment is achieved: All teams leave with agreed to, SMART team PSI objectives, ranked by business value, approved by business owners, published to all stakeholders Confidence vote is 3 or higher

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 22.5 50%

Total Release Planning Event Score PSI Execution

Scrum of Scrums meets routinely and effectively Release Management assist and adjusts scope; communicates expectations internally and externally, provides necessary governance authority Scope is appropriately managed; adjustments made primarily at sprint boundaries RTE is effective in facilitating and reporting progress Continuous integration, including automated tests happen at the system level Fortnightly System Demo is routine and effective System team is effective in its role Teams proactively interact outside of SoS to address dependencies, impediments and resolve issues

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 20.0 50%

Total PSI Execution Score PSI Results

Full solution progress is demonstrated Each team reports on actual accomplishments vs. PSI objectives Release predictability measure is routinely measured and reported Program delivers between 80-100% of non-stretch objectives Program collects and trends agreed to metrics

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 12.5 50%

Total PSI Results Score Inspect and Adapt

Session is held every PSI Most team members attend Key stakeholders attend Improvement stories are identified and itemized Improvement stories are incorporated into release planning event Session is effectively facilitated

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 15.0 50%

Total Inspect and Adapt Score Stakeholder Engagement

Program is self-organizing and self-managing Release Management Team is functional and effective Product management is agile, engaged, functional and effective throughout PSI Development management plays a supportive, empowering role and eliminates impediments outside of programs control

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 10.0 50%

Total Stakeholder Engagement Score

Page 7 of 27

Release Cycle Assessment

Scoring: 0 - Never, 1 - Rarely 2 - Occasionally, 3 - Often, 4 - Very Often, 5 - Always

Area / Question Portoflio Alignment

Program is self-organizing and self-managing Release Management Team is functional and effective Product management is agile, engaged, functional and effective throughout PSI

Score
5.0 5.0 5.0 15.0 100%

Comments

Total Portfolio Alignment Score

Total Release Train Score

110.0

54%

Radar Chart Data

Planning Readiness Release Planning Event PSI Execution PSI Results Inspect and Adapt Stakeholder Engagement Total Portfolio Alignment Score
0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0

Page 8 of 27

Agile Release Train Assessment Radar Chart

Planning Readiness
1

0.75

Total Portfolio Alignment Score

0.5

Release Planning Event

0.25

Stakeholder Engagement

PSI Execution

Inspect and Adapt

PSI Results

Progress Scope Changes

100 0

80 0

60 0

40 -15

15 -25

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1 -20 -40 2 3 4 5

Work Added Work Remaining

Start Date for First Sprint of Release Days per Sprint: Number of Sprints in Release: Total Story Points Remaining:

8/10/2013 14 16 86 86 Sprint Ending Dates ######## ######## ######## ######## ######## 8/24/2013 9/21/2013 10/5/2013 11/2/2013 1/11/2014 1/25/2014 2/22/2014 3/22/2014 9/7/2013 2/8/2014 3/8/2014
100

Release Burndown
90
80

ID

Story Title

8/10/2013

70
60 50

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Story Points Remaining 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Story 1 Story 2 Story 3 Story 4 Story 5 Story 6 Story 7 Story 8 Story 9 5 3 8 8 12 13 21 8 8 5 3 8 8 12 13 21 8 8

40
30 20

10
0

Insert New Rows Above this Line Projected Burndown Increment (each Sprint) Projected Target Track 5.4 86

81

75

70

65

59

54

48

43

38

32

27

22

16

11

Copy and paste the corresponding sections from the workbook you want to validate into the se Card Priority 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Short Name Card 1 Card 2 Card 3 Card 4 Commit Type Planned Planned Planned Planned Source New Feature Defect New Feature New Feature Original Estimate 5 8 3 5 Approval Yes/No Day Yes Wed Yes Wed Yes Tue Yes Wed

A simple way to check the validity of Comm Original Commitment Total Commitment Velocity Work Capacity Focus Factor Found Work Adopted Work Accuracy of Estimation Accuracy of Commitment Team Local Only Comparable Between Teams

Original Estimates for All Planned Cards Original Estimates for All Cards, whether Planned or Adopted Original Estimates for all Cards approved by the SPO by the end of the All Work Reported by the Team during the Sprint Velocity Work Capacity (Total Work Reported per Card - That Card's Original Estimate) Total C (Original Estimates for all Adopted Cards) Original Commitment 1 - (Estimate Deltas Total Commitment) Velocity (Total Commitment + Found Work)

This Sprint would be calculated as a W Your Found + Adopted Work was just 19% of the Original Commitm Also, your Product Owner approved 100% of your Total Commitment. A m

u want to validate into the sections below. Thu Fri 2 1 2 2 Day of Sprint Mon 2 3 2 Tue 1 2 1 Wed 1 2 1

Interim Calculated Values Used Below Actual 6 8 3 8 ----------------Found 1 0 0 3 ----------------Estimate Delta 1 0 0 3 ----------------Estimate Correct? Yes Yes Yes No (8) -----------------

1 2

o check the validity of Commitment 21 Points 21 Points 21 Points 25 Points 84.0% Percent 4 Points 0 Points 81.0% Percent 84.0% Percent

lanned or Adopted by the SPO by the end of the Sprint Sprint

's Original Estimate) Total Commitment Original Commitment

19.0% 0.0%

Percent Percent

rk)

t would be calculated as a WIN! 9% of the Original Commitment, and up to 20% is allowable. your Total Commitment. A minimum of 80% is required for a win.

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135

136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144

Estimation Accuracy Lookup Actual 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Correct 1 2 3 5 5 5 8 8 8 8 13 13 13 13 13 13 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

34 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135

89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144

136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144

144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144

Velocity, Work Capacity and Total Commitment (in GREY) are calculated in Story Points and, therefore, cannot be

Focus Factor, Adopted Work, Found Work, Targeted Value Contribution Increase, Accuracy of Estimation and Accu

The metrics, charts and RoboCoach advice are updated constantly as you enter the data during the Sprint. It is im data is entered at the very end of the Sprint. These items are intended for use during the Team's Retrospective as

Remember: RoboScrum can only give you grounds for questions and observations but never for accusations! Talk

Metric
Velocity Work Capacity Total Commitment Focus Factor How much effort can the Team expend in a sprint?

Use

How much value can the team plan and achieved to the Product Ow

How much work did the Team ultimately commit to achieve in the S

What percentage of the Team's total energy expenditure results in r

Adopted Work Found Work

As a percentage of the Original Commitment, how much additional w engaged?

As a percentage of the Original Commitment, how much unexpected committed to do?

Targeted Value Contribution Increase

How much change has their been in the Team's Velocity over time, s structure changes)

Accuracy of Estimation

How accurate are the Story Point estimates that the Team provides Fibonacci tab)

Accuracy of Commitment

When the Team commits towork, how accurate are they in biting off of the Sprint?

Points and, therefore, cannot be compared between teams.

, Accuracy of Estimation and Accuracy of Commitment (in BLUE) are calculated in terms of percentages and are fully portable f

he data during the Sprint. It is important to note that only those charts on pages 1, 3, 4 and 6 of the Charts tab are useful mid uring the Team's Retrospective as they reflect on how efficient and effective they have been.

ns but never for accusations! Talk to your Team, take their feedback and value your collaboration with them over these metric

Used to answer

lan and achieved to the Product Owner's satsifaction in a sprint?

expend in a sprint?

ltimately commit to achieve in the Sprint, including Adopted Work pulled forward after the Planning Meeting?

total energy expenditure results in requested-and-approved value?

Commitment, how much additional work did the Team need to pull forward before the end of the Sprint in order to stay

Commitment, how much unexpected complexity did the Team discover mid-Sprint on the work they had already

n in the Team's Velocity over time, since the initial Sprint? (Initial Sprint can be selected on the Setup tab if Team

t estimates that the Team provides for their Work? (Takes into account the Fibonacci Shadow, explained on the

k, how accurate are they in biting off a block that will keep them busy, at a sustainable pace and be delivered by the end

s of percentages and are fully portable for the purposes of comparing the performance of multiple Teams.

4 and 6 of the Charts tab are useful mid-Sprint. Everything else will be an in-progress calculation until all of the e been.

ollaboration with them over these metrics if the two conflict.

Formula
Original Estimates of All Approved Cards All Work Reported During the Sprint Original Estimates for All User Stories Velocity Work Capacity

anning Meeting?

the Sprint in order to stay

( Original Estimates for Work Pulled Forward) Original Commitment (Work Reported per Card - Original Estimates) Original Commitment

k they had already

e Setup tab if Team

Current Sprint's Velocity Original Velocity

w, explained on the

1 - (Estimate Delta Total Commit)

nd be delivered by the end

(Original Estimates) (Original Estimates + Adopted Estimates + Found Work)

ple Teams.

n until all of the

d Work)