Implicit and Explicit.
When estimating the time it takes to reach a goal, we take into account the real conditions under which we work. This is greater than the actual effort or the pure “touch time”. That is also a good thing.
There are many reasons why the duration is greater than the effort.
We call the difference between the minimum “touch time” of a process and the realistic duration the implicit buffer (belonging to the process).
We collect these implicit buffers of all the operations that are on the critical path – make them “explicit”. It is enough to estimate these buffers on average of the operations and roughly. 30% – 50% is a good rule of thumb.
Buffers are there to be consumed.
Since we work under real conditions, buffers are nothing “evil”. We are allowed to use them up. This means that the project is successfully completed “on time” if the buffer is used up at the end. If a team uses up more buffer than it has contributed to the explicit buffer, this must be compensated for elsewhere.
Rarely will anyone allow themselves buffers in order to be comfortable and stress-free. Prime Directive: We always assume the best intention. Buffers are due to real working conditions and the nature of innovation. Therefore, you can’t just cut them away.
Joint Coffee Fund.
Delays in a process are always passed on to the successor, but delays are rarely passed on. Therefore, it should become a sport to achieve a “buffer regain” when my colleagues have taken longer than estimated. At least if the process is on the critical path.
The filling level of the shared coffee cash register is transparent to everyone and all levels do their part to ensure that it does not empty too quickly.
Too Exact doesn’t make sense either.
We define ranges for the buffer status