Planning parameters
Planning parameters
This article defines the numbers used for long-term capacity planning: planning work beyond the currently in-progress scope. It exists so that roadmap dates are derived from a shared, versioned set of parameters rather than re-argued each time.
Scope: these parameters are for planning at the horizon level — sizing inbound work, projecting when a project can start, and testing whether a proposed commitment fits. They are not a substitute for a project plan once work is scheduled in A-Dato Lynx.
Key numbers
| Parameter | Value | Derivation |
|---|---|---|
| Throughput | 55 pts/week | Story points completed per calendar week, averaged over the trailing six weeks. Includes SRE work. |
| SRE inbound rate (λSRE) | 46 pts/week | Median story points of SRE work arriving per week across 2026. Measures demand, not completion. |
| Project capacity | 9 pts/week | Throughput minus SRE inbound rate. The capacity actually available for client and internal projects. |
| Unestimated overhead share | 25% of working hours | Meetings, administration, invoicing, supplies, and other work carried no story points. Stable across multiple years in Kimai. |
| Expected size — SRE item | 11 pts | Historical median story points for a single SRE item. Used to size an unscoped incident. |
| Expected size — client project | 122 pts | Historical median story points for a client project. Used to size an unscoped project without producing a project plan. |
| Expected size — other internal project | 56 pts | Historical median story points for an internal project. |
Using the parameters
Sizing unscoped work
Multiply the count of expected items by the median size for its type. This gives a planning-grade estimate without a project plan. It is valid in aggregate, across several items; it is not a commitment for any single item.
Projecting elapsed time
elapsed weeks ≈ project size ÷ project capacity
At 9 pts/week, a 122-point client project is ≈14 weeks of elapsed time assuming it is the only project in flight. At the 2026 median (5.1 pts/week) it is ≈24 weeks. Two concurrent projects do not halve either figure — they share the same remainder.
Known limitations
These are open issues, not settled parameters. Each affects the reliability of the numbers above.
- Velocity is credited to the week work was completed.
- Story points are credited to the week in which the estimate was entered, not the week the work was performed. This creates artificial spikes in the rolling average.
- Throughput is a level, not a rate
- 55 pts/week is valid only for the staffing and availability configuration that produced it. It cannot distinguish a slower team from a smaller available week. Normalising to points per available person-day would make time-off and headcount changes arithmetic rather than judgement.