Why is it helpful to define the StoryOwner in Planning instead of Sprint himself?

Last post 05:18 pm July 5, 2018
by Ian Mitchell
4 replies
08:21 am July 5, 2018

Where do you see the advantage to define the StoryOwner on Sprint Planning 2 instead to have a not assigned Sprint Backlog and every Teammember choose a ticket then, wehen he wan't.

02:22 pm July 5, 2018

What process framework are you using? Neither the Scrum Guide nor the Nexus Guide refer to "StoryOwner" or "Sprint Planning 2".

Why do you think that up-front assignment of work is better than a pull system?

02:29 pm July 5, 2018

I'm going to guess this means:

What's the advantage to start coordinating tasks between team members, which may include "assigning" tasks to Developers, during the second part of Sprint Planning (the How) over assigning entire Product Backlog Items to specific Developers on the Product Backlog at any time?


02:40 pm July 5, 2018

Well.. I think that is not our job to do this.. 

The dev team should organize itself in how he is going to deliver the increment.. How he will is his own problem not ours.. If he want to design people to do it, good, if he doesent, also good.. The important is to deliver the selected backlog in the review.  

The second part of the planning is for the dev team itself the P.O. should only be there to solve doubts about the product... 

You could recommend good methods as Scrum Master :) 

05:18 pm July 5, 2018

Why is it helpful to define the StoryOwner in Planning instead of Sprint himself?

Defining a so-called “story owner” may not be helpful at all.

Sprint Backlog items such as User Stories and/or their tasks ought to be owned by the Development Team, although they might be actioned by a particular individual at a certain time.