Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed link #142

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2025
Merged

Fixed link #142

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions docs/estimating/Risk-First-Analysis.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -166,12 +166,12 @@ All I need to do is "weigh up" the change in risks as best as I can. A lot of t

So far, we've been looking at each task individually, working out which risks we're addressing, and which ones we're exposed to as a result. If you have plenty of spare talent and only a few tasks, then maybe that's enough and you can get to work on all the tasks that have a positive [Payoff](/tags/Payoff). But if you're constrained, then you should be hunting for the [actions](/tags/Take-Action) with the biggest [Payoff](/tags/Payoff) and doing those first.

Things change too when you have a whole team engaged in the planning process. Although people will generally agree on what the risks _are_, they often will disagree on the [Probability they will occur, or the impact if they do](/thinking/Track-Risk#risk-registers). In cases like these, you might want to allow each stakeholder to "vote up" the risks they consider significant, or vote up the actions they consider to have high [Payoff](/tags/Payoff). This will be covered in further detail in the [next section](Stop-Estimating-Start-Navigating).

But for now, let's talk about in which ways this is better or worse than Planning Poker.
Things change too when you have a whole team engaged in the planning process. Although people will generally agree on what the risks _are_, they often will disagree on the [Probability they will occur, or the impact if they do](/thinking/Track-Risk#risk-registers). In cases like these, you might want to allow each stakeholder to "vote up" the risks they consider significant, or vote up the actions they consider to have high [Payoff](/tags/Payoff).

## Some Points To Note

Let's talk about in which ways this is better or worse than Planning Poker.

![Instead of Estimates](/img/generated/estimating/planner/estimates.svg)

- **We've made explicit the trade-offs for carrying out pieces of work**. If [building the right thing](Fixing-Scrum#10x) is the most important thing we can do, then making sure the whole team are on the same page with respect to what the pros or cons might be.
Expand Down
Loading