Planning Poker FAQ: Answers to Common Questions

Planning Poker is a team-based estimation method used in Agile projects. It combines collaboration and structured discussions to estimate the time, effort, or complexity of tasks. Teams use cards (often based on the Fibonacci sequence) to vote on estimates, revealing them simultaneously to avoid bias. This promotes accuracy, uncovers hidden complexities, and improves planning.

Key points about Planning Poker:

• How it works: Team members independently select estimates, then discuss and refine them.
• Benefits: Encourages collaboration, reduces bias, and improves estimation accuracy.
• Challenges: Issues like groupthink, dominant voices, or unclear user stories can arise but are manageable with preparation and facilitation.
• Tools: Physical cards or digital platforms (e.g., iAmAgile) support in-person and remote teams.
• Best practices: Prepare a clear backlog, use a consistent estimation scale, and ensure active participation.

This method not only refines estimates but also strengthens team communication and understanding of tasks.

Agile Estimating and Planning: Planning Poker ®

How Planning Poker Works

Planning Poker transforms the often chaotic task of estimation into a structured, collaborative process that helps teams arrive at reliable outcomes. By understanding each phase, teams can make the most of this technique and sidestep common issues that might derail estimation meetings. The process starts well before the actual session, with thorough preparation setting the stage for success.

Preparing for a Planning Poker Session

The groundwork for a productive session begins long before the cards come into play. The product owner must ensure the backlog is well-organized, with user stories that are clearly written and include detailed acceptance criteria. A typical user story format might look like this: "As a [user type], I want [functionality] so that [benefit]." Ambiguous requirements can lead to inconsistent or inaccurate estimates, so clarity is critical.

The Scrum Master or facilitator handles the logistics, scheduling the session and confirming that all key team members - developers, testers, and designers - are present. Including all relevant perspectives helps the team avoid blind spots during the estimation process.

Before starting, the team should agree on an estimation scale. The Fibonacci sequence (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) is a popular choice because the increasing gaps between numbers reflect the growing uncertainty of larger tasks. Depending on the nature of the work, alternative scales may also be considered.

The Planning Poker Process

Each round of Planning Poker follows a structured sequence that encourages honest input while minimizing bias. It begins with the product owner presenting a user story, explaining its context, and inviting questions about requirements, dependencies, or acceptance criteria.

Once the team understands the story, each member selects an estimate privately. This step is crucial for avoiding anchoring bias, where early suggestions might influence others. Behavioral economists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman describe anchoring bias as follows:

"[Anchoring bias] occurs when people consider a particular value for an unknown quantity before estimating that quantity. What happens is … the estimates stay close to the number that people considered - hence the image of an anchor. If you are asked whether Gandhi was more than 114 years old when he died you will end up with a much higher estimate of his age at death than you would if the anchoring question referred to death at 35."

After all estimates are revealed simultaneously, this approach reduces the risk of authority bias, where less experienced team members might feel pressured to align with senior colleagues.

If the estimates vary widely, the highest and lowest estimators explain their reasoning. These discussions often uncover hidden complexities or simpler solutions that might have been missed otherwise. The team continues with additional voting rounds until estimates align or a consensus is reached. If disagreements persist, it may signal that the user story needs to be redefined or broken down further.

Tools and Materials for Planning Poker

For in-person teams, physical cards marked with Fibonacci numbers are commonly used. Additional cards, like "?" for questions or "☕" for breaks, can also be helpful.

For remote or hybrid teams, digital tools are indispensable. Platforms like iAmAgile offer virtual card decks, real-time voting, and integration with popular project management tools. These tools can also track voting history and export estimates directly into the backlog.

Many of these platforms allow for customizable estimation scales. While the Fibonacci sequence is often used, teams may opt for alternatives like t-shirt sizes (XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL) for estimating large epics or hour-based scales (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32) for time-specific tasks.

Benefits and Challenges of Planning Poker

Planning Poker is more than just a tool - it’s a process that can shape team dynamics and improve project predictability. While it offers several advantages, it also comes with challenges that teams must navigate. By understanding both, teams can make the most of Planning Poker while addressing potential pitfalls.

Main Benefits of Planning Poker

One of the standout advantages of Planning Poker is its ability to improve estimation accuracy. Teams often find their estimates are far more reliable compared to other methods. This accuracy comes from pooling the expertise of multiple team members and encouraging discussions that uncover hidden complexities or simpler solutions - things an individual might overlook.

Another major benefit is how it strengthens team collaboration and communication. When team members explain why they gave a high or low estimate, they share valuable insights about technical approaches, potential risks, and implementation details. This dialogue fosters a shared understanding that goes beyond the estimation session itself.

The consensus-driven nature of Planning Poker also promotes a sense of ownership and accountability. When the entire team agrees on an estimate, they’re more likely to feel responsible for delivering the work within that range.

The process ensures equal participation and minimizes bias. By revealing estimates simultaneously, everyone’s input carries the same weight. As Magne Jørgensen, Ph.D. from Simula Research Lab, points out:

"the people most competent in solving the task should estimate it."

This democratic approach ensures that quieter voices aren’t drowned out, allowing valuable insights to surface.

Additionally, these estimation discussions help teams identify risks and share knowledge. For instance, if one person’s estimate is significantly higher than others, the resulting conversation might highlight overlooked edge cases or integration challenges. These early discussions help teams spot dependencies, assumptions, and potential roadblocks before diving into the work.

Finally, accurate estimates from Planning Poker lead to better sprint planning. Teams can sequence work more effectively, avoid overcommitting, and set realistic goals, resulting in more predictable timelines and smoother project execution.

Common Problems and Solutions

Despite its strengths, Planning Poker isn’t without its challenges. Groupthink is a common issue, where teams converge on an estimate without much discussion. This often happens when the process feels rushed or when facilitators fail to encourage diverse perspectives.

To combat this, facilitators need to actively invite differing opinions. For example, they might ask, “What factors could make this story more complex?” or “Are there any dependencies we haven’t considered?”

Another challenge is dealing with dominant personalities. More vocal team members can unintentionally sway the group’s estimates, sidelining quieter voices.

Time management can also be tricky. Teams sometimes spend too long debating minor differences in estimates or rush through complex stories without enough discussion. Setting clear time limits - like 10 minutes per story - can help. If consensus isn’t reached within that window, the team might need to break the story down or gather more information before estimating.

Remote teams face unique hurdles, such as time zone conflicts and technical issues that disrupt collaboration. Reliable tools and structured virtual processes can help mitigate these disruptions.

Lastly, inconsistent story point calibration can lead to disagreements. Regular calibration sessions, where teams review completed stories and compare them to their initial estimates, can help align everyone’s understanding of story point values.

Benefits vs Challenges Comparison

Benefits	Common Challenges	Mitigation Strategies
More accurate estimates from diverse perspectives	Groupthink reducing genuine discussion	Active facilitation to bring out differing views
Improved collaboration and knowledge sharing	Dominant personalities influencing others	Equal speaking time and structured discussions
Team ownership and commitment to estimates	Time management issues with lengthy debates	Set time limits, e.g., 10 minutes per story
Reduced bias through simultaneous reveals	Remote team difficulties like time zones	Use reliable tech and structured virtual processes
Early risk identification through discussions	Inconsistent calibration among members	Regular calibration sessions with reference stories
Better sprint planning with solid estimates	Rushing through complex stories	Mandatory discussion for widely varying estimates

Best Practices for Planning Poker Sessions

Planning Poker sessions work best when teams are well-prepared, guided by a skilled facilitator, and equipped with the right tools. Teams that stick to proven approaches often enjoy smoother estimation processes and better results.

Session Preparation Tips

To set the stage for success, start with a groomed backlog. Make sure user stories are clear and include well-defined acceptance criteria. Ambiguous or incomplete stories can lead to confusion and unreliable estimates.

Choose an estimation scale, like the Fibonacci sequence, and stick with it. Consistency helps the team stay aligned. Limit discussions about each story to 10–15 minutes. If a story takes longer, it’s a sign that it might need more refinement or should be broken down into smaller parts.

Ensure everyone on the team understands the estimation scale and what each value means. Reference stories - examples of completed tasks that match specific point values - can provide helpful context.

Before the session, double-check your tools. Whether you’re meeting in person or online, test everything ahead of time to avoid technical hiccups that could disrupt the session’s flow.

Once everything is ready, a skilled facilitator can keep things on track during the session.

Facilitation Methods for Team Participation

A good facilitator ensures that every team member has a voice. Their role isn’t to push for specific estimates but to encourage meaningful discussions and collaboration.

Start with the Product Owner reading each story aloud to ensure everyone has the same baseline understanding. Encourage the team to ask questions about dependencies, technical challenges, or edge cases - these discussions often reveal details that can impact the estimate.

When estimates vary widely, focus on the outliers. Ask the person with the highest estimate to explain their reasoning, then do the same for the lowest. This can uncover differing assumptions or overlooked complexities. Let the conversation evolve naturally before asking for a re-vote.

Don’t let quieter team members fade into the background. They might have valuable insights based on past experience. For example, you could say, "Sarah, since you worked on the payment integration last quarter, do you see any potential challenges here?"

If disagreements arise, dig into the reasons rather than focusing solely on the numbers. For instance, a high estimate might reflect concerns about integration difficulties or testing needs. These insights can be more valuable than the estimate itself.

Create a safe environment by reminding the team that estimates are collective predictions, not personal commitments. When people feel judged, they may hold back honest opinions, which can limit the team’s understanding of potential risks.

These facilitation techniques are especially important for keeping remote teams engaged and collaborative.

Using Technology for Remote Teams

For remote or hybrid teams, reliable tools are essential to make Planning Poker sessions run smoothly. iAmAgile's Planning Poker tool is a great example of how technology can address the challenges of distributed teams.

The Slack integration allows teams to launch Planning Poker sessions directly from their Slack channels, keeping communication and estimation in one place. This streamlined approach reduces friction and helps everyone stay focused.

Mobile access is another key feature, enabling team members to participate from anywhere - whether they’re working from home, traveling, or in different office locations. This flexibility is especially useful for teams spread across time zones.

The tool also supports customizable voting scales, so teams can stick with their preferred methods, whether it’s Fibonacci numbers, T-shirt sizes, or something unique to their workflow. This adaptability ensures consistency with existing processes.

Digital tools help maintain energy and engagement during virtual meetings. When estimates are revealed simultaneously, it preserves the collaborative nature of the process, even if team members are scattered across the globe.

For hybrid teams, these tools create a level playing field. Everyone uses the same interface, ensuring remote participants aren’t at a disadvantage compared to those in the office.

To keep remote sessions productive, encourage active camera use, manage audio to avoid distractions, and use chat for non-urgent questions. These practices help maintain focus and keep the session running smoothly.

Customizing Planning Poker for Your Team

Planning Poker is a flexible tool for Agile estimation, and tweaking it to fit your team’s dynamics can make it even more effective. Let’s explore how you can adapt it to your workflow and preferences.

Choosing Estimation Scales

The estimation scale you use can shape the success of your Planning Poker sessions. While the Fibonacci sequence (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) is a popular choice, it’s not the only option out there.

Fibonacci numbers are great for reflecting the growing uncertainty of larger tasks, making them ideal for teams working on features, bug fixes, or technical challenges. However, other scales might suit your team better:

• T-shirt sizes (XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL): These are simple and intuitive but may require extra effort to map to sprint capacity.
• Linear scales (1 to 10): These offer more precision but can lead to drawn-out debates over small differences. They work best when your team has a solid understanding of tasks and subtle variations matter.
• Custom scales: Some teams create unique scales tailored to their workflows. For instance, estimating in hours (e.g., 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16) can be helpful when tasks have clear time constraints.

The key is to pick a scale that matches your team’s work style and helps streamline discussions.

Connecting Planning Poker to Your Workflow

Integrating Planning Poker with your existing tools can make the entire estimation process smoother and more efficient. For example, iAmAgile’s Slack integration allows teams to start sessions directly from project channels, cutting down on unnecessary context switching.

When Planning Poker links to your project management tools, estimates can flow directly into your backlog. This eliminates the need for manual data entry, saving time - especially for teams that conduct multiple estimation sessions each sprint.

Additional features like mobile access ensure that every team member can participate, no matter where they are. Customizable voting scales let you stick with your preferred estimation method, while session history and reporting help track how accurate your estimates are over time. This makes it easier to refine your sprint planning process.

Real-time collaboration tools also add value by capturing important context during discussions, such as technical challenges or dependencies that might affect estimates.

US Team Considerations

When adopting Planning Poker, it’s important to account for regional factors that could impact your team’s workflow. Scheduling sessions at times that suit everyone and sticking to established routines can improve participation.

During the early stages of using Planning Poker, it’s also worth discussing how your team wants to relate abstract estimates to time-based measures. Documenting key decisions from these sessions can provide a helpful reference for future planning.

Key Takeaways

Planning Poker transforms the often tricky task of estimation into a collaborative process that unites teams through shared understanding. By encouraging open discussions and group insights, it ensures that everyone is on the same page.

The success of this method depends on a few key factors: thorough preparation, balanced facilitation, and thoughtful customization. Proper preparation not only improves accuracy but also helps teams reach consensus more quickly.

Choosing the right estimation scale is another critical piece of the puzzle. The scale you select shapes how your team approaches task complexity. For example, Fibonacci sequences are well-suited to software development, while t-shirt sizes are ideal for creative projects. On the other hand, a linear scale works best for tasks where time sensitivity is key. The trick is finding the scale that matches your team’s way of thinking.

Remote teams might face some unique challenges, but with the right tools and practices, virtual Planning Poker sessions can be just as engaging and productive as in-person ones. Features like real-time collaboration, mobile access, and integration with other tools keep everyone involved and the process running smoothly.

But Planning Poker is about more than just numbers. It brings teams together, uncovers hidden assumptions, and encourages knowledge sharing. Teams that focus on the discussions - not just the votes - often see stronger collaboration and better results in their sprints.

To make Planning Poker a regular part of your workflow, tie sessions directly to your backlog, track estimation accuracy, and continuously refine your process. This approach not only improves estimates but also enhances delivery predictability, keeping your agile process flexible and effective.

FAQs

How can remote teams use Planning Poker to collaborate effectively and create accurate estimates?

Remote teams can make Planning Poker work effectively by using online tools that enable real-time collaboration. These platforms let team members provide their estimates independently, ensuring everyone’s input is unbiased and that all voices are heard. This method encourages open communication and leads to more accurate estimations.

For teams spread across various time zones, asynchronous options are a practical solution. These tools allow participants to contribute on their own schedules, offering flexibility without losing the collaborative spirit. By tapping into digital platforms designed for interactive estimation, remote teams can deliver precise outcomes while keeping teamwork on track.

How can we avoid groupthink and encourage diverse input during Planning Poker sessions?

To keep groupthink at bay and encourage a variety of perspectives during Planning Poker sessions, it's crucial to have each team member share their estimate independently before any group discussion begins. This step ensures that no single voice dominates and allows everyone’s unique viewpoint to surface.

Fostering open dialogue is equally important. Create a space where team members feel safe sharing differing opinions without hesitation. When estimates differ widely, take the opportunity to dig into the reasoning behind those numbers. These conversations often uncover valuable insights and can lead to a more accurate and well-rounded consensus.

Lastly, reinforce the value of diverse viewpoints. Remind the team that disagreement isn’t just normal - it’s a critical part of reaching better estimates. By embracing differing opinions, the team can collaborate more effectively and make stronger decisions together.

How do different estimation scales, like Fibonacci numbers or T-shirt sizes, affect the accuracy and efficiency of Planning Poker?

When it comes to Planning Poker sessions, the choice of estimation scale - whether Fibonacci numbers or T-shirt sizes - can significantly affect the trade-off between precision and speed.

Fibonacci numbers are a popular option because they reflect the increasing uncertainty that comes with estimating larger tasks. This makes them particularly useful for improving accuracy when dealing with complex or detailed work.

On the other hand, T-shirt sizes offer a straightforward and intuitive way to group tasks by effort. While this method prioritizes speed over precision, it’s a great fit for high-level estimates, especially in the early phases of a project when rough approximations are all you need.

In short, Fibonacci scales are ideal for detailed planning, while T-shirt sizes shine during quick, broad estimations. The best choice depends on your team’s goals and how much detail is required for the session.