<![CDATA[Winning Strategy: AI Track]]>https://www.vibhorchandel.com/s/ai-trackhttps://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!mjtJ!,w_256,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F4e258c32-d257-4e33-8285-eee4e00bd853_256x256.pngWinning Strategy: AI Trackhttps://www.vibhorchandel.com/s/ai-trackSubstackWed, 12 Aug 2026 16:50:56 GMT<![CDATA[AI for Agile Teams: What to Automate, What to Review, and What Must Stay Human]]>https://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/ai-for-agile-teams-what-to-automate-with-aihttps://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/ai-for-agile-teams-what-to-automate-with-aiThu, 09 Jul 2026 14:43:40 GMTQ: “Our Agile teams are starting to use AI tools for things like writing user stories, summarizing meetings, generating test cases, analyzing backlog items, and drafting status updates. While this is helping us save time, I’m not sure where to draw the line. What parts of Agile teamwork can we safely automate with AI, and what should always be reviewed by humans?”

Thank you for the question.

Many Scrum Masters are asking the same question right now:

Where should AI help the team, and where should people stay in charge?

Teams already use AI for many things. That can save a lot of time and reduce admin work.

But AGILITY depends on judgment. It depends on context, trust, and shared understanding.

So the question is: how do we decide how much to depend on AI?

How to decide:

  1. What work AI does independently

  2. What work remains fully human-owned

  3. What work needs human review

Agile teams could benefit from a delegation model for AI (download below), and this post offers exactly that.

Let’s get started.

Got an urgent question?

Get a quick answer by joining the subscriber chat below.

Read more

]]><![CDATA[Daily Standup Best Practices for AI Assisted Teams]]>https://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/daily-standup-best-practices-for-ai-assisted-teamshttps://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/daily-standup-best-practices-for-ai-assisted-teamsSun, 31 May 2026 12:04:49 GMT

I used to think the Daily Standup was the one thing that didn’t need to change when a team adopted AI.

I was so very WRONG!

When a Scrum team adopts AI in its workflow, the Daily Standup SHOULD ALSO evolve.

The purpose of the Daily Scrum remains the same:

To help the team inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal and adapt the plan for the next 24 hours.

But since AI changed, how work is done, where risks appear, and what the team needs to discuss, it has introduced some new risks, such as:

  • low-quality generated output,

  • hidden assumptions,

  • security concerns,

  • prompt dependency,

  • duplicated work, and

  • reduced shared understanding.

So…

When this is the situation… how do you guide your teams so the Daily Standup remains focused, transparent, and outcome-oriented?

Let’s find out.

Got an urgent question?

Get a quick answer by joining the subscriber chat below.

Read more

]]><![CDATA[11 things Atlassian Rovo AI can't do yet]]>https://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/11-things-atlassian-rovo-ai-cant-do-yethttps://www.vibhorchandel.com/p/11-things-atlassian-rovo-ai-cant-do-yetThu, 14 May 2026 12:03:46 GMTIn my last post, we looked at how Scrum Masters are successfully using Rovo’s out-of-the-box agents to handle repetitive admin tasks.

But if you’ve used AI for more than a week in the trenches, you know that the demos always look good, and they are nothing like reality. When AI meets a legacy Jira instance, things break.

Rovo is powerful, but it has distinct boundaries.

In this post, I discuss 11 such boundaries of Atlassian’s Rovo AI and how my teams have navigated around them.

Let’s get started.

Got an urgent question?

Get a quick answer by joining the subscriber chat below.

What kind of posts do you want to see on Winning Strategy?

In order to provide you with maximum value out of this publication, please use the above poll and send me your interest.

Read more

]]>