Expire and reforecast

Give the forecast a replacement rule

Choose a routine checkpoint and material-change triggers. A fortnightly or Sprint-end review can refresh delivery observations and backlog order. Event triggers include a team change, a new work type, a changed definition of finished, a material cost change or observations outside the assumptions used.

When a trigger fires, archive the current version. Record what changed, recalculate with an appropriate evidence window and return the result to the decision owner. A date owner may reduce or reorder scope. A budget owner may stop or defer work. If minimum scope is protected, show the revised time and investment range.

The Scrum Guide says the Sprint Review inspects the outcome and identifies future adaptations. It also says past performance, upcoming capacity and the Definition of Done support confidence in Sprint forecasts. Scrum does not define release planning or require this replacement rule. The rule is an authored governance extension.

Reforecasting is not permission to hide a miss. Preserve the prior basis so the team can tell whether the change came from learning, altered scope, delivery-system performance or a previously invisible queue. Adding people should initially be a scenario, not a higher observed rate; use new evidence when it exists.

Failure mode: a team redraws the plan every fortnight but no decision changes. Recalculation without a named owner and consequence is reporting theatre. The review is complete only when the evidence confirms the current decision or changes scope, date, investment or risk acceptance.

Worked example and transfer practice

All examples below are fictional teaching material. Use synthetic notes; no workplace or personal data is required or uploaded.

Archive the basis before replacing it. A fictional fixed-date plan assumes one security specialist and unchanged acceptance rules. The specialist leaves. Record the trigger and old basis, prepare a new scenario with its evidence limits, and return the scope choice to the date owner. A calendar review is useful, but a material context change can require action before it arrives.

Try before reading the guide: Create four fields: evidence window, governing constraint, current range and replacement rule. Add who decides and what happens if no representative evidence is yet available.

Practice review guide

The replacement rule names both a checkpoint and material-change events. When evidence is weak, qualify the plan or pause the commitment; relabeling a desired rate as observed throughput is insufficient.