Priority Poker erlaubt es dem Testteam, bewusste Entscheidungen für die Teststrategie (z.B. auf Basis von ISO 9126) oder für Session Based Test Management herbei zu führen. Diese Präsentation gibt eine Übersicht über Priority Poker, wie es eingesetzt werden kann und welche Vorteile es im Vergleich zu den bekannten Ansätzen bietet. Karten können gerne bei uns angefragt werden.

1. Priority
Poker
for
So,ware
Tes1ng
Introduction and examples
SwissQ Testing Team, March 2012

2. 1 Herausforderung
Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Examples
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 2

3. Priorities of tests!
Existing priorization is often superficial and does not really go into the
really (un)critical areas.
Page 3

4. Different views!
Each stakeholder has his own view of „what is how important“.
BA‘s / Dev‘s / Supplier Specialist
Tester
Employer
Project leader Clients Business Management
Additionally:
- Common understanding
- Understand each others needs
Page 4 - All information available

5. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Example
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 5

6. Use of relations
The relative weight produces the test intensity.
Not important Very important
Page 6

7. Weighing with Fibonacci numbers
2100
3400
300
500
100
200
100
1300
800
Page 7

8. The social process
The social process creates a common view of the priorities and risks.
Dev‘s User
Business
Management
Project leader
Business
Analyst
Page 8

9. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Examples
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 9

10. Setting the right priorities
Page 10

11. Priority Poker
When playing Priority Poker, all stakeholders set the priorities
together. Be it for requirements, for test strategies, test objects, or test
cases.
Priority Poker uses the corresponding game cards (can be ordered
at SwissQ) and a list of elements to be weighed as e.g.
requirements, specifications, user stories, use cases, test objects,
test cases or bugs.
All important stakeholders participate, the selection and
distribution of information has to be done beforehand. Each
person receives a card set.
A moderator who can‘t play is leading the poker session. He‘s
responsible for the adherence to the time boxes and stops
solution-oriented discussions.
Page 11

12. Card values
I need a break! I need an explanation!
Not important Very important
(cold) (hot)
Page 12

13. Estimate
Risk view 3 low 2 medium 1 high
 How often will the object to be
estimated be used?
1 high
 What‘s the damage if the object
doesn‘t work?
2 medium
Possible damage
Benefit view
 How probable is it that the object will
3 low
be used?
 How great is the measurable use of
Probability of occurrence
the object?
Page 13

14. First round
Step 1: Topic Descr. Value
Presentation of the object to be estimated. 1 Topic 1
2 Topic 2
Max. 2 minutes
Moderator
… …
Step 2:
“Secret" estimate of object.
Max. ½ minute
Step 3:
Simultaneous disclosure of the estimate.
Page 14

15. Explanation of estimate / Second round
Step 4: 1300
because…
Explanation of highest and lowest estimate. 200
because…
Max. 1 minute
Step 5:
2. “Secret" estimate of object.
Max. ½ Minute
Step 6:
Simultaneous disclosure of second round of estimates.
Page 15

16. The decision / Next estimates
Step 7: OK OK
500?
Aggreement to one estimate OK
Max. 1 minute
Moderator
Next steps:
Topic Descr. Value
Repeat procedure until all points on the list
have been estimated. 1 Topic 1 500
2 Topic 2 1300
The points can now be prioritized and
worked on accordingly. 3 Topic 3 300
4 Topic 4 2100
5 Topic 5 1300
6 Topic 6 3400
7 Topic 7 800
Page 16

17. Rules
Goal-oriented to the right priorities
 Time boxes have to be respected
Each activity in Priority Poker is timed and the moderator has to make sure that
those time boxes are followed.
 No solution-oriented discussions
Only questions about comprehension will be asked 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 a new 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 17

18. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Example
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 18

19. Comparative estimate of biggest countries
Country Estimate
Belgium 200*
Germany
France
Italy
Liechtenstein
The Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
Switzerland
Spain
Page 19 * = to be used as reference for estimate

20. Comparative estimate of biggest countries
Country Size in km² Relation*
Belgium 32.55 200
Germany 357.1 2300
France 543.9 3400
Italy 301.3 1300
Liechtenstein 0.16 100
The Netherlands 41.5 300
Norway 323.7 2300
Sweden 449.9 3400
Switzerland 41.3 300
Spain 504.6 3400
Page 20 * = approximate relation according to personal estimate

21. Comparative estimate
Comparative estimates are often easier and more precise. They also
remain valid if the adopted basis of the relation changes.
Pro Con
 Relation mostly remains the same even if the  First estimates takes time until the team „rides
absolute value of the objects changes (e.g. the same wave“
complexity or number of users)  Reference objects needed as a point of
 There are no discussions about absolute values orientation for estimators
(LoC, number of users, etc.)  Risk of solution-oriented or other philosophical
 The really important elements are very quickly discussions during sessions
identified, as well as the insignificant ones  Risk that single estimators dominate the group
 If an element is extremely important it can be or use their political power
divided up for more deliberate processing
Page 21

22. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Example
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 22

23. Exercise: how big is the dog?
 Bernese mountain dog
 Chihuahua
 Alsatian
 Dachshund
 Mastino
 Collie
 Greyhound
Page 23

24. Additional information
Page 24

25. Exercise: how big is the dog?
 Bernese mountain dog
 Chihuahua
 Alsatian
 Dachshund
 Mastino
 Collie
 Greyhound
Page 25

26. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Examples
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 26

27. Priority Poker works because...
 Priority Poker brings together the different experts and decision makers.
These experts make up a „cross-functional“ team uniting all important
disciplines, and constitute the best team to set the priorities.
 The active exchange during the poker sessions ensures the information flow
and thus leads to a common view of the priorities supported by all parties.
 And it‘s fun!
Page 27

28. Priority Poker can be used for (practically) anything!
 Project plans and activities
 Design of road maps
 Release and product planning
 User stories
 Evaluation of ideas and innovation
 ... And much more!
Page 28

29. 1 Challenge
2 Method
3 Priority Poker in detail
4 Comparative estimates
5 Example
6 Summary
7 Next steps
Page 29

30. 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)
 You want guidance while testing Priority Poker? SwissQ provides
you with a moderator for max. 2 hours for free.
Page 30

31. 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 31