nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Auto-scheduling not changing dates

Stephen Bond_1vmk0h

Hi,

I am a new user of advanced roadmaps, and experimenting with auto-scheduling. I have a set of sub-tasks assigned to one person, and was hoping that auto-scheduling would move them to ensure that person is not overloaded (i.e. change the dates so they are sequential, rather than concurrent). However, when I run Auto-Schedule, the dates are unchanged.

I'm wondering whether this is something that auto-schedule should be able to do, and if so, what I need to do to achieve that?

Thanks,

Stephen

Comments

Dave

Hi @Stephen Bond,

Although auto-scheduling does take the number of members in a team into consideration and schedules issues with respect to them, unfortunately it does not explicitly assign issues to any specific individual - only to the team that the individual belongs to.

To give a concrete example of this - if you have 2 people in a scrum team, with a velocity of 10 points, the auto-scheduler will not assign an 8 point issue into a single sprint because it assumes that the velocity is split evenly between the 2 team members. It also works on the assumption that individuals will not "swarm" on a single story level issue but that only one person will work on any one story level issue at a time.

For the most part you could possibly argue that it makes more sense for issues to be manually distributed throughout the team in rather than having everything assigned - I would expect that Atlassian would get quite a bit of push back if this was how it worked, but I'd be interested to know your thoughts.

We're actually looking into individual capacity planning in quite a bit of detail at the moment so I'm very interested in your use cases here. We're thinking of ways in which we can visualise how loaded each person is but there are various edge cases we want to consider.

For example - do you find that individuals only belong to a single team? Or can they split their time between multiple teams? Would you want the assumption to be that all individuals contribute evenly to a team or you would you like the ability to control each members contribution?

Regards,

Dave

Stephen Bond_1vmk0h

Hi @Dave

Many thanks for your quick response.

My basic use case is actually very simple (and I realise I didn't explain it very well initially...). I have a set of Jira tickets (mostly sub-tasks), which are assigned to individuals. I don't want to change that assignment. However, I do want Jira to change the dates of those tasks such that each individual is not assigned more that one task at a time - in other words, for each individual, to make the tasks sequential instead of concurrent. In some cases there may be dependencies between tasks which need to be honoured; in other cases the tasks can be done in any order.

I am currently not using scrums and have not defined teams - is it valid to try to use auto-scheduling in this scenario? When I auto-schedule, it seems Jira wants to add teams to each task, so I guess I need to do something there (but I'm not completely clear what should constitute a team in this sense).

To answer your question, in most cases, individuals will be just working on one broad set of tasks, rather than splitting their time between multiple teams.

Another thing that would be nice would be to see where individuals are overloaded. I can see this functionality is available in the WBSGantt plugin, but not in advanced roadmaps (as far as I know).

Stephen

Dave

Hi @Stephen Bond,

So generally speaking the auto-scheduler will want to assign teams to issues, but as I mentioned it will never explicitly set an assignee (or change an existing one). However, it might schedule issues in the assumption that they could be picked up by another member of the team.

If you've not defined a team yet, then I would expect that you'll find that a team has automatically be created for you and is associated with the issue source (i.e. the project, board or filter) that you used to create the plan - and this is the team that the scheduler is being assigned.

By default this generated team will be empty and you can choose to add members to it. The benefit of adding members is (currently) somewhat opaque but the main benefit is that it will evenly divide the teams weekly hours or point velocity between it's members.

However - based on what you've said, I'd be concerned that unless you're creating a single person per team that you're going to lose the ability to control overbooking - i.e. you might want a single person to do all the sub-tasks for a specific issue but the auto-scheduler might be expecting them to be picked up by others in the team (and the dates set on the issue will reflect that).

So the only way I can see that you can get the auto-scheduler to work as you'd like is to have single member teams and that is probably too much overhead or might prevent you from doing other things with teams.

The visualising individual overloading is something we definitely want to get to and is something I've recently been prototyping, but it's too early to say if/when that will be available.

Regards,

Dave

Stephen Bond_1vmk0h

Hi @Dave

Thanks for your helpful response. I've been experimenting some more, and I have had some success by setting up one-person teams. However, this has led to another issue: in some cases I have sub-tasks (of a particular task) which are assigned to different people. These sub-tasks seem to automatically inherit their team from their parent task - it doesn't seem to be possible to assign different teams to them. Is there any way around this?

Thanks,

Stephen

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

server

advanced-roadmaps