Definition of Ready

Ready for what?

Ready to be picked up by the delivery team and added to a Timebox/Sprint backlog.

NOT:

Defined to the nth degree of detail so that no further discussion is required.

Definition of Ready:

Like the DoD, the DoR is defined by the team and should be updated whenever it seems appropriate e.g if there's a big change in the team or the work; or the team simply sees the need for a change.
Being agreed and enforced by the team means that it should, hopefully, mean an end to the common moaning in retrospectives that 'the story was crap'.

As the team gets used to only selecting 'ready' stories it focuses grooming/refinement sessions to ensure that the top priorities are in the best possible state.

The business/product owner will also very quickly understand the need for good prioritisation and quality stories. This is driven home the first time a team refuses to take a priority story into an iteration.

While there are a number of ways to start, many people are familiar with the INVEST principles for writing good user stories.

This stands for:

Independent, Negotiable, Valuable, Estimable, Small and Testable

DoR must, at the very least, address value, testable and estimable.

What might a basic DoR look like?

A story:

must have a defined business value (whether relative - points - or absolute - financial)
must be testable (by the owner at least, but also by the delivery team)
must be estimable (if it's too big to estimate, break it down. If we don't know enough to estimate, discuss it further and add details.)
must be prioritised in the team backlog
must exist in the tool used to store the team's stories (Cards or electronic)
must have a defined owner willing to work with the team and sign it off

Comments

Continuous (Self) Improvement

“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” - Leo Tolstoy Introduction: Most people talk a great game about continuous improvement. And as a group, most of us truly agree with and see the benefits of, the concept as applied to our projects and teams. Sprint Retrospectives, Post Implementation Reviews, 5S, DMAIC, PDSA (not the dog people) and so on. But... Do you practice it personally ? I don't mean training courses, formal development plans and all the other bureaucracy that people step through stoically every year in a bid to get a pay rise. I'm referring to the small (but meaningful) improvements we can make every day. Or to work in an Agile principle: "At regular intervals, the team (of one in this case) reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly." Step 1: Feedback (aka input to the CI process): Of course, all improvements need to be identified i...

Fear and blame.

Hands up if you've ever heard someone say: "We don't have a fear-and-blame culture." And keep them up if the reaction of the 'doers' was to roll their eyes and mutter something sarcastic. It's a nice phrase to trot out at a senior leadership conference or to write in your 'best employer of 2020' application, but if you have to say it, it's probably not true. And repeating the mantra won't make it any more true. In fact, people might respect you more if you were honest and admitted that there is blame and where the boundaries lie. At least in that scenario, the individual knows where they stand. Instead, we often have the jarring dissonance of hearing our leaders say one thing and seeing them act entirely differently. As a leader (especially a senior leader): When you stand at the front of a room and tell the assembly that there is no fear-and-blame, look at their faces. If they mostly appear too scared to dis...

Agile Armchair Generals

If you're an Agile practitioner of any sort you will understand what I mean by Armchair Generals (if not, it may be an idea to check if you are one..). Apropos of nothing an email arrives that questions the management of your project in terms of whether it is properly 'Agile'. Feedback is, of course, a great tool. But it must always be understood within the context of the person providing it. So when the email lands questioning the type of contingency you've built into your project or the depth of analysis performed on your requirements set, ask yourself: 1. Has the questioner spotted something you and the team have missed? It happens. That's why independent reviews can be helpful. 2. Has the questioner misunderstood something about your project? If so, maybe your communications weren't quite clear enough or they've missed something - it happens, we're all busy. If the questioner has understood the topic correctly and is simply disagreeing ...

IT Project Management - life on the front line

Search This Blog