Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Prioritizing Agile Work with Weighted Shortest Job First

Weighted Shortest Job First

Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) is a prioritization model that has gained significant traction in the world of agile software development and project management. It is a critical component of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), which helps organizations scale agile practices across multiple teams and departments. WSJF’s primary goal is to enable teams to prioritize their work based on the value it delivers and the effort required, ultimately maximizing the economic outcomes for the organization.

The Economic Rationale Behind WSJF

Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) is a prioritization model that is firmly grounded in economic principles. It acknowledges that every project, feature, or initiative comes with an associated cost and potential value, and that the timing of delivery can have a significant impact on the overall economic outcomes. By prioritizing work based on the WSJF score, which considers both the Cost of Delay (CoD) and the job duration, teams can make data-driven decisions that align with the organization’s economic objectives.

image 6

The WSJF model demonstrates the economic rationale behind prioritizing work items based on their relative value and urgency. Items with high WSJF scores should be prioritized over those with low WSJF scores. High WSJF scores indicate that an item has a high Cost of Delay relative to its job duration, meaning that it delivers significant value in a short amount of time. By focusing on high WSJF items first, teams can minimize the total Cost of Delay and realize value more quickly.

On the other hand, items with low WSJF scores have a lower Cost of Delay relative to their job duration. These items may still deliver value, but the value is not as significant or urgent compared to high WSJF items. Prioritizing low WSJF items over high WSJF items can lead to suboptimal economic outcomes, as the total Cost of Delay will increase due to the delay in delivering high-value work.

The WSJF model provides a clear framework for calculating the relative priority of work items. By assigning a Cost of Delay and estimating the job duration for each item, teams can calculate the WSJF score (CoD divided by duration). Items with higher WSJF scores are prioritized over those with lower scores. This data-driven approach to prioritization ensures that the team is consistently working on the most economically valuable tasks.

Furthermore, WSJF helps organizations optimize their return on investment (ROI) by minimizing the opportunity cost of delayed deliveries. When high-value features (those with high WSJF scores) are delivered early, the organization can start realizing the benefits sooner, such as increased revenue, improved customer satisfaction, or reduced operational costs. This early realization of value contributes directly to the bottom line and demonstrates the tangible impact of the team’s work.

WSJF also enables organizations to make the most effective use of their limited resources by aligning the team’s efforts with the economic priorities of the business. It helps teams avoid wasting time and effort on low-value or low-urgency items (those with low WSJF scores) and instead focus on delivering the work that will have the greatest impact on the organization’s success. This alignment is crucial in today’s fast-paced and competitive business environment, where organizations must be able to quickly respond to changing market conditions and customer needs.

Moreover, WSJF promotes a culture of continuous improvement and learning within the organization. By regularly reviewing and adjusting WSJF scores based on new information or changing priorities, teams can adapt their work to maximize economic value. This iterative approach encourages teams to constantly seek ways to optimize their processes, reduce waste, and deliver more value to the business.

Finally, WSJF provides a common language and framework for discussing priorities and making trade-off decisions. By using WSJF scores as a basis for prioritization, teams can have more objective and data-driven conversations about which work items should be tackled first. This helps to reduce conflicts and ensure that everyone is aligned around the most important goals.

The economic rationale behind WSJF is compelling. By prioritizing work based on the WSJF score, which takes into account both the Cost of Delay and the job duration, teams can make economically sound decisions that maximize value delivery, optimize ROI, and contribute directly to the organization’s bottom line. The distinction between high and low WSJF scores is crucial, as it ensures that teams are always focusing on the most valuable and urgent work items. Organizations that embrace WSJF can expect to see significant improvements in their ability to deliver value quickly, adapt to changing market conditions, and drive long-term success.

Understanding Cost of Delay (CoD) and Its Importance

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a critical component of the Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) prioritization model. It represents the potential economic loss or opportunity cost incurred by delaying the delivery of a particular feature, project, or initiative. Understanding and accurately assessing the Cost of Delay is essential for making informed prioritization decisions that maximize value delivery and align with the organization’s economic goals.

image 5

The Cost of Delay is comprised of three key elements:

  1. User/Business Value: This represents the tangible or intangible value that a particular item delivers to the users or the business. It could be in the form of increased revenue, improved customer satisfaction, enhanced productivity, or any other measurable benefit. The higher the user/business value, the higher the Cost of Delay.
  2. Time Criticality: This factor considers the urgency or time sensitivity of an item. Some features or initiatives may have a narrow window of opportunity or may be tied to specific deadlines or events. Delaying such items could result in missed opportunities or significant economic consequences. The more time-critical an item is, the higher its Cost of Delay.
  3. Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement: This element takes into account the potential risks mitigated or future opportunities enabled by delivering a particular item. Some features or initiatives may not deliver immediate value but could pave the way for future growth, innovation, or competitive advantage. Delaying such items could hinder the organization’s ability to capitalize on potential opportunities or expose it to unnecessary risks.

By considering these three elements, teams can develop a comprehensive understanding of the Cost of Delay associated with each work item. This understanding is crucial for making informed prioritization decisions that optimize the economic outcomes for the organization.

The importance of accurately assessing the Cost of Delay cannot be overstated. Underestimating the Cost of Delay can lead to suboptimal prioritization, where low-value or less urgent items are given undue priority. This can result in delayed delivery of high-value features, missed opportunities, and reduced ROI. On the other hand, overestimating the Cost of Delay can lead to an overly reactive approach, where teams constantly shift priorities based on perceived urgency rather than true economic value.

To effectively assess the Cost of Delay, teams need to engage in collaborative discussions and gather input from various stakeholders, including customers, business owners, and subject matter experts. These discussions should focus on understanding the business context, market dynamics, and customer needs. 

Teams should also leverage historical data, user feedback, and competitive insights to inform their Cost of Delay estimates.

Once the Cost of Delay has been determined, it is used in conjunction with the estimated job duration to calculate the WSJF score for each work item. The WSJF score provides a clear, quantitative basis for prioritization, ensuring that the items with the highest economic value and the shortest job durations are given top priority.

However, it is important to note that the Cost of Delay is not a static measure. As market conditions, customer needs, and business priorities change, the Cost of Delay associated with each item may also evolve. Therefore, teams should regularly review and update their Cost of Delay estimates to ensure that their prioritization remains aligned with the current economic realities.

In summary, understanding and accurately assessing the Cost of Delay is a critical aspect of the WSJF prioritization model. It enables teams to make informed decisions that maximize economic value, minimize opportunity costs, and drive long-term success for the organization. By considering user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction/opportunity enablement, teams can develop a comprehensive view of the economic impact of each work item. This understanding, combined with the estimated job duration, forms the basis for effective prioritization and value delivery.

Calculating WSJF: The Formula Explained

At the heart of the Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) prioritization model lies a simple yet powerful formula that enables teams to quantify the relative priority of work items. The WSJF formula takes into account two key factors: the relative Cost of Delay (CoD) and the relative job size. By combining these factors, teams can calculate a WSJF score for each item, which serves as a clear, objective basis for prioritization.

The WSJF formula is expressed as follows:

image 4

WSJF = Cost of Delay  / Job Size 

Let’s break down each component of the formula:

  1. Cost of Delay : As discussed earlier, the Cost of Delay represents the potential economic loss or opportunity cost incurred by delaying the delivery of a particular item. In the WSJF formula, the Cost of Delay is expressed as a relative value, rather than an absolute monetary amount. The relative CoD is determined by considering three key elements: user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction/opportunity enablement.

To calculate the relative CoD, teams assign relative scores to each of these elements for each work item. The scores are usually based on a specific scale (e.g., 1-10 or 1-100) and are determined through collaborative discussions and input from relevant stakeholders. The total relative CoD for an item is the sum of the scores assigned to each element.

For example, let’s consider a feature with the following relative CoD scores:

  • User/Business Value: 8
  • Time Criticality: 5
  • Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement: 3

The total relative CoD for this feature would be 16 (8 + 5 + 3).

  1. Job Size: The job size represents the estimated amount of effort required to complete a particular work item, relative to other items in the backlog. It is typically expressed in relative units, such as story points or t-shirt sizes (e.g., small, medium, large). The relative job size is estimated by the development team based on their understanding of the work involved, the complexity of the item, and their past experience with similar tasks.

It is important to note that the relative job size should only include the actual development and testing effort required to deliver the item. It should not include any additional time for waiting, delays, or dependencies.

Once the relative CoD and job size have been determined, the WSJF score can be calculated by dividing the relative CoD by the relative job size.

For example, let’s consider the feature mentioned earlier with a relative CoD of 16 and an estimated relative job size of 4 story points.

WSJF = 16 / 4 = 4

This means that for every unit of effort invested in developing this feature, the organization can expect to gain 4 units of value.

Teams can calculate the WSJF scores for all items in their backlog and then rank them in descending order. The items with the highest WSJF scores should be given top priority, as they represent the most valuable work that can be delivered with the least amount of effort.

It’s important to remember that WSJF is a relative prioritization model. The absolute values of the WSJF scores are less important than their relative values. What matters is the rank order of the items based on their WSJF scores, not the specific numeric values.

By using the WSJF formula, teams can make data-driven prioritization decisions that optimize the economic value delivered to the organization. The formula provides a clear, objective way to compare the relative priority of different work items and ensures that the most valuable work is always given the highest priority.

However, it’s crucial to keep in mind that the WSJF formula is only as good as the inputs used to calculate it. Teams must invest time and effort in accurately assessing the relative Cost of Delay and estimating relative job sizes. This requires ongoing collaboration, communication, and refinement to ensure that the WSJF scores remain accurate and relevant.

The WSJF formula is a simple yet powerful tool for quantifying the relative priority of work items. By dividing the relative Cost of Delay by the relative job size, teams can calculate a WSJF score that serves as an objective basis for prioritization. The items with the highest WSJF scores represent the most valuable work that can be delivered with the least amount of effort and should be given top priority. By using the WSJF formula, teams can make data-driven decisions that maximize economic value and drive long-term success for the organization.

Estimating the Cost of Delay: A Practical Approach

Accurately estimating the Cost of Delay (CoD) is crucial for the successful implementation of the Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) prioritization model. The CoD represents the relative economic impact of delaying the delivery of a particular work item, and it is a key input in the WSJF formula. However, estimating the CoD can be challenging, as it often involves subjective assessments and assumptions. In this section, we will explore a practical approach to estimating the Cost of Delay, including the use of the Fibonacci sequence.

As mentioned earlier, the Cost of Delay is determined by considering three key elements: user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction/opportunity enablement. To estimate the CoD, teams need to assign relative scores to each of these elements for each work item.

Here’s a step-by-step approach to estimating the Cost of Delay:

  1. Define the scoring scale: Establish a consistent scoring scale for assessing the relative value of each element. A common approach is to use the Fibonacci sequence: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89. Each Fibonacci number represents a relative level of value or importance, with higher numbers indicating higher value. Ensure that all team members understand and agree on the scale being used.
  2. Assess user/business value: For each work item, consider the value it delivers to the users or the business. This could include factors such as increased revenue, improved customer satisfaction, enhanced productivity, or any other measurable benefit. Assign a Fibonacci number to the user/business value based on the defined scale. For example, if a work item has a high user/business value, you might assign it a 5.
  3. Evaluate time criticality: Assess the urgency or time sensitivity of each work item. Consider factors such as market demand, competitive pressure, legal requirements, or any other time-bound constraints. Assign a Fibonacci number to the time criticality based on the defined scale. For example, if a work item is extremely time-critical, you might assign it a 13.
  4. Consider risk reduction/opportunity enablement: Evaluate the potential risks mitigated or future opportunities enabled by delivering each work item. This could include factors such as reducing technical debt, improving system stability, enabling new features or products, or opening up new markets. Assign a Fibonacci number to the risk reduction/opportunity enablement based on the defined scale. For example, if a work item has a moderate impact on risk reduction or opportunity enablement, you might assign it a 3.
  5. Calculate the total CoD: Sum up the Fibonacci numbers assigned to each element (user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction/opportunity enablement) to obtain the total Cost of Delay for each work item.
  6. Review and refine: Review the CoD estimates with the team and stakeholders to ensure that they accurately reflect the relative value and importance of each work item. Make adjustments as needed based on feedback and any new information that becomes available.

image 3

Using the Fibonacci sequence for CoD estimation offers several benefits:

  • It provides a clear and consistent scale for relative estimation.
  • It allows for a wider range of values, enabling teams to differentiate between work items with varying levels of value or importance.
  • It aligns with other agile estimation techniques, such as story point estimation, which also commonly use the Fibonacci sequence.

To make the CoD estimation process more effective, consider the following tips:

  • Involve the right stakeholders: Engage product owners, business analysts, customer representatives, and other relevant stakeholders in the estimation process. They can provide valuable insights into the business context, market dynamics, and customer needs.
  • Use historical data: Leverage data from past projects or similar initiatives to inform the CoD estimates. Look for patterns or trends that can help validate the assumptions being made.
  • Consider dependencies: Take into account any dependencies between work items. Delaying a particular item may have a ripple effect on other items, increasing the overall Cost of Delay.
  • Regularly review and update: Continuously review and update the CoD estimates as new information becomes available or as priorities change. The CoD is not a static measure and should be adapted to reflect the current reality.

By following this practical approach, utilizing the Fibonacci sequence, and considering these tips, teams can develop more accurate and reliable Cost of Delay estimates. These estimates, along with the relative job size, form the basis for calculating the WSJF scores and making informed prioritization decisions.

Remember, the key is to be consistent, collaborative, and continuously improving the estimation process. By investing time and effort in accurately assessing the Cost of Delay, teams can ensure that their prioritization decisions are aligned with the economic goals of the organization and maximize the value delivered to stakeholders.

Job Duration and Its Role in WSJF

In the Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) prioritization model, job duration plays a crucial role alongside the Cost of Delay (CoD) in determining the relative priority of work items. While the CoD captures the potential economic impact of delaying a work item, job duration represents the estimated effort required to complete that item. By considering both factors, WSJF enables teams to make informed prioritization decisions that maximize value delivery and optimize resource allocation.

Let’s delve into the concept of job duration and its significance in the WSJF framework:

  1. Definition of job duration: Job duration refers to the estimated amount of time or effort needed to complete a specific work item, from start to finish. It encompasses all the necessary activities, including development, testing, and any other tasks required to deliver the item to the customer or stakeholder.
  2. Relative estimation: In the context of WSJF, job duration is typically estimated using relative sizing techniques, such as story points or t-shirt sizes (e.g., small, medium, large). These relative estimates provide a high-level indication of the effort required for each work item, without getting bogged down in precise time estimates. Relative sizing allows teams to compare the duration of different work items and make prioritization decisions accordingly.
  3. Estimating job duration: To estimate job duration, teams can use various techniques, such as planning poker, affinity mapping, or historical data analysis. The key is to involve the right people, including developers, testers, and other relevant stakeholders, to ensure that the estimates are as accurate and realistic as possible. Teams should consider factors such as complexity, uncertainty, dependencies, and team capacity when estimating job duration.
  4. Relationship with CoD: Job duration and Cost of Delay are the two components used to calculate the WSJF score. The WSJF score is determined by dividing the CoD by the job duration (WSJF = CoD / Job Duration). This formula emphasizes the importance of considering both the value (CoD) and the effort (job duration) when prioritizing work items. Items with a higher CoD and a lower job duration will have a higher WSJF score, indicating a higher priority.
  5. Balancing value and effort: By incorporating job duration into the WSJF calculation, teams can make more informed trade-off decisions. For example, if two work items have similar CoD values, but one has a significantly shorter job duration, it may be prioritized higher because it delivers value faster with less effort. WSJF helps teams strike a balance between delivering high-value items and optimizing the use of their limited resources.
  6. Continuous refinement: Just like the CoD, job duration estimates should be regularly reviewed and refined as the team gains more knowledge and experience. As work items progress through the development process, teams may uncover new information or face unexpected challenges that impact the job duration. Regular backlog refinement sessions provide an opportunity to revisit and adjust job duration estimates based on the latest insights.
  7. Impact on planning and forecasting: Accurate job duration estimates are essential for effective planning and forecasting. By understanding the relative effort required for each work item, teams can better plan their sprints, allocate resources, and set realistic expectations with stakeholders. Job duration estimates help teams determine their capacity and velocity, which are key inputs for long-term planning and release management.

In summary, job duration is a critical component of the WSJF prioritization model. It represents the estimated effort required to complete a work item and is used in conjunction with the Cost of Delay to calculate the WSJF score. By considering both value and effort, WSJF enables teams to make data-driven prioritization decisions that optimize value delivery and resource utilization. Accurate job duration estimates, along with regular refinement and continuous improvement, are essential for effective planning, forecasting, and ultimately, the successful implementation of WSJF in agile teams.

Implementing WSJF in Agile Teams

Implementing Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) in agile teams requires a structured approach to ensure a smooth adoption and effective execution. WSJF is a powerful prioritization model that helps teams make data-driven decisions based on the relative value and effort of work items. Let’s explore the key steps and considerations for implementing WSJF in agile teams.

  1. Educate and Train the Team:
    • Provide comprehensive training to all team members on the WSJF concept, its principles, and its benefits.
    • Explain the components of WSJF, including the Cost of Delay (CoD) and job duration, and how they are used to calculate the WSJF score.
    • Conduct workshops or sessions to familiarize the team with the estimation techniques, such as relative sizing and the Fibonacci sequence.
    • Ensure that everyone understands their roles and responsibilities in the WSJF process.
  2. Establish a Clear Workflow:
    • Define a clear workflow for implementing WSJF within the team’s existing agile process.
    • Determine at which points in the process WSJF will be applied, such as during backlog refinement or sprint planning.
    • Establish guidelines for estimating CoD and job duration, including the involvement of relevant stakeholders.
    • Set up a cadence for regularly reviewing and updating WSJF scores based on new information or changing priorities.
  3. Collaborate with Stakeholders:
    • Engage key stakeholders, such as product owners, business analysts, and customer representatives, in the WSJF process.
    • Involve them in defining and estimating the CoD for each work item, considering factors like user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction/opportunity enablement.
    • Foster open communication and collaboration between the development team and stakeholders to ensure a shared understanding of priorities and value.

  4. Use Visual Tools and Metrics:
    • Utilize visual tools, such as WSJF boards or charts, to provide transparency and clarity on the prioritization of work items.
    • Display the WSJF scores, CoD, and job duration estimates visually to facilitate discussions and decision-making.
    • Track and monitor relevant metrics, such as cycle time, throughput, and value delivered, to assess the impact of WSJF on the team’s performance.
  5. Foster Continuous Improvement:
    • Encourage a culture of continuous improvement and learning within the team.
    • Regularly review and retrospect on the WSJF process, identifying areas for improvement and making necessary adjustments.
    • Gather feedback from team members and stakeholders to refine the estimation techniques, workflow, and collaboration practices.
    • Celebrate successes and learn from failures, using them as opportunities to enhance the WSJF implementation.
  6. Adapt to Team and Organizational Needs:
    • Recognize that each team and organization is unique, and adapt the WSJF implementation to fit their specific context and needs.
    • Be flexible and open to adjusting the process based on the team’s size, experience level, and project characteristics.
    • Align the WSJF implementation with the overall organizational goals and values to ensure cohesion and support.

Remember, implementing WSJF is an iterative process that requires patience, commitment, and a willingness to learn and improve. It may take time for the team to become proficient in estimating CoD and job duration, and there may be initial challenges in aligning priorities with stakeholders. However, with consistent effort, communication, and collaboration, WSJF can become a valuable tool for agile teams to make data-driven prioritization decisions and deliver maximum value to their customers and stakeholders.

The Impact of WSJF on Prioritization and Economic Outcomes

Implementing Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) in agile teams can have a significant impact on prioritization decisions and economic outcomes. By considering both the Cost of Delay (CoD) and job duration, WSJF enables teams to make data-driven decisions that optimize value delivery and align with the organization’s economic goals. Let’s explore the impact of WSJF on prioritization and economic outcomes in more detail.

  1. Improved Value Delivery:
    • WSJF helps teams prioritize work items based on their relative value and urgency, ensuring that the most valuable features or initiatives are delivered first.
    • By focusing on high-value items with the shortest job duration, teams can maximize the value delivered to customers and stakeholders in the shortest possible time.
    • This prioritization approach leads to faster time-to-market for critical features, enabling the organization to capture market opportunities and stay ahead of the competition.
  2. Reduced Opportunity Cost:
    • WSJF minimizes the opportunity cost associated with delaying high-value work items.
    • By prioritizing items with a high CoD, teams ensure that the economic impact of delays is minimized, as the most valuable work is completed first.
    • This reduces the potential loss of revenue, market share, or customer satisfaction that could result from delaying important features or initiatives.
  3. Enhanced Decision-Making:
    • WSJF provides a structured framework for making prioritization decisions based on objective criteria.
    • It eliminates subjective biases and gut feelings, ensuring that decisions are driven by data and aligned with the organization’s economic objectives.
    • The WSJF framework facilitates collaborative decision-making, as teams and stakeholders can openly discuss and agree on priorities based on a shared understanding of value and effort.
  4. Optimized Resource Allocation:
    • WSJF helps teams optimize the allocation of their limited resources by focusing on the most valuable work items.
    • By prioritizing items with a high WSJF score, teams ensure that their time and effort are invested in the work that delivers the greatest economic value.
    • This optimization leads to improved efficiency, productivity, and overall team performance, as resources are directed towards the most impactful work.
  5. Increased Transparency and Alignment:
    • WSJF promotes transparency and alignment between the development team and stakeholders.
    • The prioritization process becomes more visible and understandable, as the WSJF scores provide a clear rationale for the order in which work items are tackled.
    • This transparency fosters better communication and collaboration, as everyone has a shared understanding of priorities and the economic reasoning behind them.
  6. Adaptability to Changing Priorities:
    • WSJF allows teams to quickly adapt to changing priorities and market conditions.
    • As new information emerges or business needs change, teams can easily recalculate WSJF scores and adjust their priorities accordingly.
    • This adaptability ensures that teams remain responsive to the most pressing economic opportunities and challenges, maximizing value delivery in a dynamic environment.
  7. Long-Term Economic Benefits:
    • Implementing WSJF can lead to significant long-term economic benefits for the organization.
    • By consistently prioritizing high-value work and minimizing the economic impact of delays, teams contribute directly to the organization’s bottom line.
    • Over time, this prioritization approach can result in increased revenue, improved customer satisfaction, and a competitive edge in the market.

To quantify the impact of WSJF on economic outcomes, organizations can track and measure relevant metrics, such as:

  • Cycle time: The time it takes to deliver a work item from start to finish.
  • Time-to-market: The speed at which new features or initiatives are delivered to customers.
  • Return on Investment (ROI): The financial return generated by delivered work items compared to the investment made.
  • Customer satisfaction: The level of satisfaction and loyalty among customers as a result of the value delivered.

By monitoring these metrics and comparing them before and after the implementation of WSJF, organizations can assess the tangible impact of WSJF on their economic performance.

It’s important to note that the success of WSJF relies on accurate estimation of CoD and job duration, as well as consistent application of the prioritization framework. Teams should continually refine their estimation techniques, gather feedback from stakeholders, and adapt their processes to maximize the economic benefits of WSJF.

In summary, the impact of WSJF on prioritization and economic outcomes is significant. By aligning work prioritization with the organization’s economic goals, WSJF enables teams to deliver maximum value, reduce opportunity costs, optimize resource allocation, and adapt to changing priorities. The long-term economic benefits of implementing WSJF can be substantial, contributing to increased revenue, customer satisfaction, and competitive advantage. By embracing WSJF and continuously improving its application, agile teams can drive positive economic outcomes and support the overall success of their organizations.

By adhering to these best practices, your organization can effectively implement WSJF and reap the benefits of data-driven prioritization, improved value delivery, and better economic outcomes. Remember that implementing WSJF is a journey that requires patience, commitment, and a willingness to learn and adapt. By fostering a culture of continuous improvement and collaboration, you can successfully integrate WSJF into your agile practices and drive long-term success for your organization.