ES-01
Estimation Inconsistency (SP Consistency)
SP Consistency
Default severity: critical
EstimationMetricsQualityEffort
What it detects
Story point allocation consistency falls below the configured threshold — estimation hygiene is broken. Measured as coefficient of variation per team. cv = stddev(sp_per_team) / mean(sp_per_team)
Detection formula
IF cv > config.estimation.consistency_cv_threshold // default: 0.5 OR sp_consistency_pct \< config.estimation.min_consistency_pct // default: 60% THEN FLAGExamples in practice
- Estimated at planning; unchanged in sprint
- Estimates, time logged, and actual effort no longer align for a meaningful share of items.
- The team commits to sizes that are not supported by historical spend patterns.
Suggested response
Align estimation and logging practices so size, time spent, and scope changes remain comparable.
Coaching playbook
Symptom
Story point allocation consistency falls below the configured threshold — estimation hygiene is broken. Measured as coefficient of variation per team. cv = stddev(sp_per_team) / mean(sp_per_team)
Why it matters
When "Estimation Inconsistency (SP Consistency)" keeps appearing, the team is signalling a repeatable process gap. Left unexamined, the pattern hides where work really stalls and makes improvement metrics harder to trust.
What you can achieve
Align estimation and logging practices so size, time spent, and scope changes remain comparable.
Facilitation questions
- What system change would stop "Estimation Inconsistency (SP Consistency)" from firing again?
- What do the cited issues have in common — same root cause or same workaround?
- Who owns the two-week experiment and how will we verify on the next import?
Run this rule against your own tracker data with Flow Analyzer.