Examples

Example: FL3 Calculation for 3 Changes

We have three initiatives:

• Introduction of two-factor authentication
• New dashboard for users
• Database migration to new version

Step 1: EXI and EVI Estimates

Each initiative is rated in Planning Poker (e.g., Fibonacci sequence: 1–2–3–5–8–13…).

• EXI (Execution Index) = complexity, risk, uncertainty of implementation
• EVI (Evolution Index) = benefit, opportunity, future value

Initiative	EXI (Complexity)	EVI (Benefit)
Two-factor authentication	8	13
User dashboard	5	8
Database migration	13	8

Step 2: EXI/EVI Ratio Calculation

Formula:

Strategic ratio = EXI/EVI

The lower the ratio, the better the return (low complexity × high benefit).

Initiative	EXI	EVI	EXI/EVI Ratio
Two-factor authentication	8	13	0.62
User dashboard	5	8	0.63
Database migration	13	8	1.63

Step 3: Result Interpretation

• Priority 1: Two-factor authentication (0.62) – high benefit, relatively lower complexity.
• Priority 2: User dashboard (0.63) – almost as beneficial as 2FA.
• Priority 3: Database migration (1.63) – more complex than its benefit; better to postpone or prepare supporting capacity.

✅ FL3 Output: the team has a clear order of changes based on EXI/EVI ratio.

On FL2, they will be further broken down into segments (BVI/EFI), and on FL1 into specific tasks in hours.

---

FL2 Example: "User Dashboard"

Step 1: Breaking Down into Smaller Parts

We divide the large initiative (dashboard) into 3 segments:

• UI components (widgets, filters, charts)
• Data connection (API, query, performance)
• Notifications and personalization (user preferences, alerts)

Step 2: BVI and EFI Estimates

• BVI (Business Value Index) = benefit for users/business
• EFI (Effort Index) = work effort estimate

We again use the Fibonacci sequence (1–2–3–5–8–13…).

Segment	BVI (Value)	EFI (Effort)
UI components	13	8
Data connection	8	13
Notifications and personalization	5	5

Step 3: BVI/EFI Ratio Calculation

Formula:

Coordination ratio = BVI/EFI

Segment	BVI	EFI	BVI/EFI	Necessity
UI components	13	8	1.63	YES
Data connection (minimal)	8	8	1.00	Yes
Notifications	5	5	1.00	No
Report export to PDF/Excel	5	8	0.63	No

Step 4: Result Interpretation

• UI components – YES + best ratio
• Data connection (minimal) – YES (must-have)
• Notifications – balanced
• Report export – lowest return, can be postponed

✅ FL2 Output: we know which dashboard parts have the highest effort return.

On FL1, we then convert these parts into specific tasks in hours.

---

FL1 Example: "UI Components" (from dashboard)

Step 1: Task Breakdown

We divide the segment into specific tasks of max. 8 hours (1 workday).

We assume we'll build a basic dashboard with 3 main widgets.

• Dashboard layout design (wireframe, basic layout)
• Implementation of "Active Tasks" widget (table, filters)
• Implementation of "Progress Chart" widget (burndown / velocity)
• Implementation of "Recent Activities" widget (log, change list)
• Testing and UI fine-tuning (cross-browser, basic UX)

Step 2: Hour Estimates

Each task has an owner and estimate in hours (max. 8h).

Task	Estimate (h)
Dashboard layout design	4 h
Implementation of "Active Tasks" widget	8 h
Implementation of "Progress Chart" widget	8 h
Implementation of "Recent Activities" widget	6 h
Testing and UI fine-tuning	6 h

Step 3: Sum and Capacity Check

4+8+8+6+6=32 hours

This corresponds to about 1 week of one person's capacity (40 h).

Remaining reserve of 8h → can cover unexpected adjustments or bugfixes.

Step 4: Result Interpretation

• Tasks are sufficiently granular (each max. 1 day).
• The estimate is realistic, covers ~1 sprint of one person's daily output.
• The team knows exactly who does what and when it can be completed.

✅ FL1 Output: concrete work plan for dashboard UI components – 32 hours / 1 week for one person.