Good article. I think your idea is good, but “traditiomal story point” scoring with the fibo sequence has always worked well in mature teams I have worked in. Uncertainty and the other factors you have mentioned are usually reflected when scores are shown, and are wildly different. This should then prompt a discussion so everyone in the team has considered everything, and re-scoring should occur until all scores are one boundary apart, and the higher score picked. I feel your approach may reduce discussions and foster a culture to just provide a score quickly.
This system adds a lot of complexity to scoring which I seriously doubt the team members appreciate when doing it.
Also, if a business gets one group of developers to score a story, and then gets another set to carry out the work, this is obviously going to cause problems and nomatter your approach to scoring, it will always be wrong.
And if the business needs to relate story points to cost, this needs to be dynamically based on the current velocity, and the team’s total cost. This could then be translated to a day rate. It may be a hard sell to some businesses but unless something like that is agreed, you’ll forever have business people hovering round the developers trying to relate a story point to a fixed measurement of time.
