## Is Introducing Levels of Decomposition Necessary for Product Backlog Transparency? No, introducing levels of decomposition is not required for Product Backlog transparency. While it can help communicate levels of ambiguity—e.g., initiatives are typically more ambiguous than epics, which are more ambiguous than stories, and so on—this practice should be considered optional. Use decomposition only when it adds clarity and value. Otherwise, it risks generating unnecessary overhead. In some cases, too many levels of detail can obfuscate more than they reveal, making the backlog harder to understand instead of easier. > [!experience] Earlier in my career, I worked with a leadership team that tracked only high-level initiatives. Year-long efforts were reduced to single-line spreadsheet entries, reviewed weekly. Since nothing ever moved to "done," it appeared the tech team wasn’t delivering. </br> In reality, leadership expected visible weekly progress on multi-year projects—but by rolling everything up, they obscured the effort involved. This led to unrealistic expectations and a distorted view of team performance. ## Works Consulted 1. [Product Backlog Levels of Decomposition](https://www.scrum.org/resources/blog/product-backlog-levels-decomposition) | Scrum.Org | Accessed 12 Jul. 2025. ## Connections follows:: [[1.1b1b Access Without Clarity Is Not Transparency]] topics:: [[Product Backlog]], [[Transparency]], [[Levels of Decomposition]] ![[Footer]]