It seems that some people have some quite strong views on the "right" way to track progress. Here's my view. In the red corner, we have the traditional burn- down graph. You start with a certain amount of estimated work, and as you finish it you cross it off the list. You finish when you hit zero. In the blue corner, we have the burn- up graph. Here you still have a certain amount of estimated work represented as a line across the graph. Work is added cumulatively and you finish when you reach the target amount of work. OK, so what's the difference? In my opinion, not much. Some suggest that a burn-up graph is psychologically more motivating because it is going up. Others I have spoken to prefer to see completion as zero, and like to see work left heading downwards. Personally I'm with the burn-downers. Another factor in choosing which way the burn goes might be ease of changing the goalposts - in other words, how easy is it to add or remove from the backlog est