NotWorking -Reports>Sprint Burndown Chart. Can it track "In Review" stage as opposed to "Done"stage.

[GameDev]

Hi

Please see attached screenshot for easier explanation. We have added a "In Review" stage from the usual classic or next-gen

TO DO

IN PROGRESS

DONE

So it now reads

TO DO

IN PROGRESS

IN REVIEW

DONE

However its messed up our Sprint burndown chart, understandably, as we have our "In review" meeting at the end of the sprint to QA all the tasks moved from "In Review" to "Done". 

If the sprint burndown chart tracked when team users changed the status to "In review" we would get a far more accurate result.

is there anyway of doing this please?

Thank you & with Regards

[GameDev]

Hello Nic

Thank you for the reply. We are a AAA Game Developer and the nature of our work dictates the flow. For example, we may have 11 Art passes on a game character. Pass 11 (months later) is nothing like Pass 1 (Basic skeleton mesh). So "In Review" is a process for an Art Pass.

We can, technically, for that sprint include it as a "done" process like you say, and if it isnt past the strict/high QA Mark re-open it. Because we have a very inclusive team mindset the people who say its "done" is the team, or the product owner, obeying the Scrum Master Certification Guidelines. Many team members complete a task for review and place "In Review" for the team to analyse, then it is completed and put into "Done." With over a dozen members our review meetings take an hour.

We have also learnt other AAA Game Developers also use this process of "In Review" prior to "Done". Otherwise, i guess , anyone on the team can put "Done" if theyre faking progress.

Surely there must be a 3rd party App that allows you to customise the burndown chart metrics? Microsoft Excel is a breeze and it would be done in minutes. The only problem is integration with Excel into the Jira platform is something i dont have time for. Assuming it could be done.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Your definition of done is inconsistent in your teams and hence in your process.

You need to decide if "in review" is actually done or not, and have everyone understand which one it is.  At the moment, you're using it as a subjective measure - some of your people think it means done, others do not.  That cannot work, it is an objective thing.

Your burndown will work once you have a consistent definition of done.

[GameDev]

Hello Nic

I understand what you say. This unable to define "done" is a by-product/hazard-waste-of working with New Technology. Let me give you our example.

Sprint 1 was "match competitor EAs Fight Night Boxer Model." Its also called "Next-Gen" in our industry-speak.

We surpassed this and it was definately, 100% "Done". However the definition of "Next-Gen" has now changed with PlayStation5 and Xbox Series X whom we are developing for. So the same task of developing a player model has "Next-Gen" Boxer in. We could put 16K Textures in thats "Done" for Next-Gen standards. We could put deforming muscles (ie bicep Squeeze), thats Next-Gen "Done", We could do in Sprint 2 "Sweat Normals (Sweat maps of the body as the fight progresses the boxer sweats more and is clearly visible). 

Any single one of these tasks can be considered "Done" if using hitting the Next-Gen mark. However, its not like buying a packet of crisps "done" and is extremely subjective, especially when the hardware itself dictates if its Done or not. This is why we put "In Review" when that task is done, to decide if it hits the bar of the competition and can go in game.

We also know other AAA Game Developers also use "In Review" as its standard practise in our industry.

Please see attached screenshot.

(IMAGE REMOVED BY MODERATORS, as it is unrelated to thread, looks to be accidental post)

SOLUTION.

We may do away with "In Review" to get the Jira burndown figures for "Done" as stated here and make a new stage "Complete" and put it in the end, this way Jira updates a task "In Review" now > "Done" so we get out burndown. At the end of the sprint we review all the "Done" tasks and those truly done are put in "Complete" stage, those that need re-opening and further work for the reasons described above are then re-opened for another sprint.

Thank you for your contribution.

[GameDev]

To Moderators: The image was not unrelated nor an accidental post, it was directly related to the sprint question.

I wonder if you read the contents of the questions/posts, or solutions.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

I think that's the crux of the point.  "Done" should never be subjective.

Whatever your practice is, your process is failing if two people cannot agree that something is "done and hence needs no more work".

(fwiw, the image looked like an advert and was not adding anything to the conversation - your writing is perfectly clear and did not need any help at all)

[GameDev]

What advert? We are buried in the depths of a technical board that has zero advertising value except to project managers. If i cant post my work to other project managers to better describe the problem we have in searching for solutions whats the point of having a picture feature of your work?

If we wanted adverts we'd be on youtube, which we have, 30,000 hits and a national tv station interviewing us. On its 1st day we had 15,000 hits.

Your answer is typical of Jira-Project Managers from the non-Games Industry and a problem with trying "Done" for Astra Zeneca or The Home Office but not usefull for the Creative Industries, in this case the Video Games Industry.

"Done" to an Artist is as high as the victoria falls depending on the talent, if the software doesnt conform to real life variations of done that isnt our fault.

I think i need a conversation with our Jira account manager who sympathises with the software limitations and its adaptation to the Games Industry.

[GameDev]

And youve totally ignored the comment we have found out through business intelligence other games industry firms also use "In Review" within Jira so have the same problem in burndown as us. I suspect they purchased an app to correct the fix which is what we are investigating, the marketplace is big enough for such a feature.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

<sigh>  You're not reading or understanding the points being made here.

My answers are typical of, um, people who have processes that work.  Yes, I've worked with Jira for Astrazeneca and the home office, but I've actually done more work with Blizzard, Square Enix, and the BBC, so I've seen how they work.   And plenty of other places across all sorts of industries.

They all work fine without having a subjective done, or by working in different teams.

It is fine if it is subjective between teams (for example, the developers consider "in review" to be done, but the testers do not), but if you're going to work with subjective values, then your people need to be working separately from each other and you need to recognise that they're not working together.  For the very simple example I've typed there, you would set up a board for each separate team - the developers board would have "in review" and "closed" in the last column, and the testing team would only have "closed" in their last column.

There are no apps or tweaks that can change the way reality works.  You need to decide what you want to report on and whether you want a single objective done or to split along subjective lines.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Burn-down is calculated when you deliver what you said you would, not when it's part way through.

The only way to get this to show burn-down for in-review is to have that step considered as "done", which you can do by moving the status into the last column on the board (which means "done")