A short introduction into priority poker and how it can help. Priority poker cards and poster can be ordered for free on our website.

1. Priority
Poker
Introduction and Example
SwissQ, June 2012

2. Page 2
Herausforderung
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7
Challenge

3. Prioritization
§ The word prioritization derives from the Latin adjective „prior“ for
earlier, first.
§ Prioritization helps to allocate resources by sorting tasks, problems
or other items according to their
§ importance (relevance, criticality) and/or their
§ urgency (short/middle/long term)*
§ The purpose is to usefully allocate the limited (financial) resources,
capacities and time.
Page 3 * Source: wikipedia.de

4. The Eisenhower Method
Page 4
§ Well known and self-explanatory
§ But, in everyday life the urgent
supersedes the important
§ When something gets urgent,
it is mostly already too late
§ Often, a lot is urgent and important
(thus, it isn‘t divisible or even
manageable any more)
not urgent urgent
importantunimportant

5. Which are the true priorities?
Page 5
Existing prioritization is often too superficial and does not really
address the very (un-)critical topics.
ProbabilityofOccurrence
Extent of Damage
ProbabilityofOccurrence
Impact on the Project (deadlines, costs, quality)
low high low medium high
lowhigh
low
<25%
medium
25%-75%
high
>75%

6. Different Views!
Page 6
Each stakeholder has his own view of „what is how important“.
Project Manager
BA‘s / Dev‘s /
Testers
Customer
End User
Suppliers Specialists
ManagementBusiness
Additionally:
- Common understanding
- Understand each others needs
- All information available

7. Challenges
§ Current models often don‘t help in identifying the really important
elements
§ 80% are priority 1 (or priority AAAAAA+++)
§ The focus is not on the really critical or profitable topics
§ Important stakeholders are often not included in the process,
which results in a lot of disagreement about priorities
§ The social process of creating a mutual understanding is ignored
Page 7

8. Page 8
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

9. Prioritization
u Is a unit of measurement
u Is a middle way between subjective and objective evaluation
Priority Poker provides this middle way
Ø All project members who are important for prioritization get
involved
Ø Individual first estimates followed by discussion
Ø Final decision by the team after the second estimate
Page 9

10. Use of Relations
Page 10
Not important Extremely important
The relative evaluation reveals their importance in relation to each
other.

11. Evaluation with Fibonacci Numbers
Page 11
100
100
200
300
800
500
1300
2100
3400

12. Relative Estimates
Page 12
Working with relative estimates is often easier and more precise. They
remain valid even if the assumed basis of the relation changes.
Pro‘s Con‘s
§ First estimates take more time,
until the team is in the „flow“
§ Reference objects are needed as a point of
orientation for estimators
§ Risk of solution-oriented or other philosophical
discussions during sessions
§ Risk that single estimators dominate the group
or use their political power
§ Relation mostly remains the same even if the
absolute value of an item changes (e.g.
complexity or number of users)
§ There are no discussions about absolute values
(LoC, number of users, etc.)
§ The really important elements are identified very
quickly. So do the unimportant ones.
§ If an element is extremely important it can be
split up for more deliberate processing

13. The Social Process
Page 13
The social process leads to a common view of priorities and risks.
Project Manager
Business
Analysts
Management
UsersDevelopers
Business

14. The Procedure also includes...
§ Estimate of Experts
§ Knowledge is at hand
§ Open questions can be answered
§ Team estimate doesn’t put too much focus on experts
§ Analogies
§ Comparison of / relation to other items during estimation
§ Disaggregation (maturity / dissolution)
§ Splitting up elements because of too high complexity, risk, etc.
§ Revealing and closing information gaps
§ etc.
Page 14

15. What can be prioritized?
§ Project portfolio
§ Release and product planning
§ Design of roadmaps
§ Change requests
§ Requirements
§ Risks, tasks and activities
§ Evaluation criteria (e.g. for
value benefit analysis)
§ Allocation of budget, resources
§ Evaluation of ideas and
innovation
§ Nutritional value of food...
§ ... and much more!
Page 15

16. Page 16
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

17. Setting Priorities Right
Page 17

18. Priority Poker
Page 18
When playing Priority Poker, all stakeholders set the priorities
together. Be it for requirements, change requests, risks or test cases.
§ Priority Poker uses the corresponding game cards (can
be ordered at SwissQ) and a list of elements to be
evaluated such as requirements, specifications, user
stories, use cases, test objects, test cases or bugs.
§ All relevant stakeholders participate, the selection and
distribution of information has to be done beforehand.
Each person receives a card set.
§ A moderator - who doesn‘t play the game himself - is
leading the poker session. He is responsible for the
adherence to the time boxes and suppresses solution-
oriented discussions.

19. Card Values
Page 19
I need a break! I need an explanation!
Not important
(cold)
Extremely important
(hot)

20. Estimate
Page 20
Risk View
§ How often will the item be used?
§ How severe would be the extent of
damage if the object doesn‘t work?
Benefit View
§ How probable is it that the object will
be used?
§ How large is the measurable benefit of
the object?
1 high2 medium3 low
Probability of Occurrence
1high2medium3low
ExtentofDamage

21. The First Round
Page 21
Step 1:
Presentation of the item to be estimated.
Moderator
Step 2:
First “secret" estimate of the item.
Step 3:
Simultaneous disclosure of the estimates.
Max. 2 minutes
Max. ½ minute
Topic Descr. Value
1 Topic 1
2 Topic 2
… …

22. Explanation of Estimates / The Second Round
Page 22
Step 4:
Explanation of highest and lowest estimate.
Max. 1 minute
200
because…
1300
because…
Step 5:
Second “secret" estimate of the object.
Step 6:
Simultaneous disclosure of the second round of estimates.
Max. ½ minute

23. The Decision / Next Topics
Page 23
Next steps:
Repeat procedure until all topics of the list
have been estimated.
The topics are prioritized then and can be
worked on accordingly.
Step 7:
Aggreement to one estimate
Moderator
Max. 1 minute
500? OK
OK
OK
Topic Descr. Value
1 Topic 1 500
2 Topic 2 1300
3 Topic 3 300
4 Topic 4 2100
5 Topic 5 1300
6 Topic 6 3400
7 Topic 7 800

24. Rules
§ Time boxes have to be respected
Each activity in Priority Poker is time boxed and the moderator has to make sure
that those time boxes are followed.
§ No solution-oriented discussions
Only questions about comprehension will be allowed and answered during the
poker rounds. If a topic on the priority list remains unclear it has to be discussed
outside the round and will be reintroduced into another poker round later.
§ No session lasts longer than two hours
A new session will be scheduled if there are still non-prioritized topics on the list
after two hours.
Page 24
Goal-oriented to the right priorities

25. Page 25
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

26. Relative Estimate of Country Size
Page 26
Country Estimate
Belgium 200*
Germany
France
Italy
Liechtenstein
The Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
Switzerland
Spain
* = serves as a reference value for the other estimates

27. Relative Estimate of Country Size
Page 27
Country Size in kkm² Relation*
Belgium 32.55 200
Germany 357.1 2100
France 543.9 3400
Italy 301.3 1300
Liechtenstein 0.16 100
The Netherlands 41.5 300
Norway 323.7 2100
Sweden 449.9 3400
Switzerland 41.3 300
Spain 504.6 3400
* = approximate relation according to personal estimate

28. Page 28
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

29. Exercise: How Big is the Dog?
§ Bernese mountain dog
§ Chihuahua
§ Alsatian
§ Dachshund
§ Mastino
§ Collie
§ Greyhound
Page 29

30. Additional Information
Page 30

31. Exercise: How Big is the Dog?
§ Bernese mountain dog
§ Chihuahua
§ Alsatian
§ Dachshund
§ Mastino
§ Collie
§ Greyhound
Page 31

32. Page 32
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

33. Priority Poker works because...
§ Priority Poker brings together different experts and decision makers.
These experts make up a „cross-functional“ team uniting all
important disciplines, and therefore constitute the best team to set
the priorities.
§ The active exchange during the Priority Poker session ensures the
information flow between those experts and thus leads to a common
view of the priorities which is supported by all parties.
§ And it‘s fun!
Page 33

34. Priority Poker can be used for (practically) anything!
§ Project plans and activities
§ Design of roadmaps
§ Release and product planning
§ User stories
§ Evaluation of ideas and innovation
§ Nutritional value of food...
§ ... and much more!
Page 34

35. Page 35
Challenge
Approach
Priority Poker in Detail
Relative Estimates
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Summary6
Next Steps7

36. Next Steps
§ You can order Priority Poker sets at SwissQ. Just call
(+41 43 288 88 40) or send an e-mail (info@SwissQ.it)
§ Do you want guidance in playing Priority Poker?
SwissQ provides a moderator for max. 2 hours for free.
Page 36

37. References
§ Mike Cohen, 2005, Agile Estimating and Planning, Prentice Hall
International
§ Mike Cohen, Planning Poker for Estimating on Agile Projects,
http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/topics/planning-poker
§ Ilan Goldstein, Relative Estimation Communication,
http://www.scrumshortcuts.com/blog/category/estimation/
§ Malte Foegen (Wibas), 2006, Planning Poker: A slightly different take on
estimating, Power-Point
Page 37