PSM-II Exam Dumps : Professional Scrum Master II

• C: Velocity has no direct relationship with value. This is a true statement, as velocity is a measure of the amount of work done by a Scrum Team in a Sprint, not the value or quality of that work. Velocity can vary depending on many factors, such as the size, complexity, and priority of the Product Backlog items, the skills and experience of the Developers, the Definition of Done, and the Sprint length. Therefore, velocity is not a reliable indicator of value creation or team performance.
• D: Velocity is the amount of business functionality that a Scrum Team creates in a Sprint. It is unique to that team and used as an input to Sprint Planning. This is a true statement, as velocity is a team-specific metric that reflects how much business functionality the Scrum Team can deliver in a Sprint. Velocity can help the Scrum Team to forecast how many Product Backlog items they can select for the next Sprint, based on their past performance and current capacity. However, velocity is not a goal or a target for the Scrum Team, and it should not be compared across teams.

References:

• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 15: “Velocity is a measure of how much work a team can complete in a given time period. It is usually expressed in terms of story points or function points per Sprint.”
• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 16: “Velocity is not a measure of value or quality. It does not tell us anything about the usefulness, usability, or desirability of the product increment.”
• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 17: “Velocity is unique to each team and depends on many factors, such as the size and complexity of the work items, the skills and experience of the team members, the definition of done, and the length of the Sprint.”
• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 18: “Velocity can be used as an input for Sprint Planning, to help the team forecast how much work they can realistically accomplish in the next Sprint. However, velocity is not a goal or a target for the team, and it should not be used to compare or evaluate teams.”

A. The stakeholders have not been using the Sprint Reviews to actively engage, and inspect and evaluate progress. This is a possible factor that may have led to the disappointment and anger of the stakeholders. The Sprint Review is an event where the Scrum Team and the stakeholders collaborate to inspect the product Increment and adapt the Product Backlog based on feedback and new insights. If the stakeholders do not participate actively in the Sprint Review, they may miss the opportunity to provide input, voice their concerns, and influence the direction of the product development.

D. The Scrum Master has not ensured transparency. This is another possible factor that may have led to the disappointment and anger of the stakeholders. The Scrum Master is accountable for establishing and promoting transparency among the Scrum Team and the stakeholders, by ensuring that everyone has a clear and common understanding of the product vision, the Product Goal, the Product Backlog, the Sprint Goal, the Sprint Backlog, and the Definition of Done. Without transparency, there may be misalignment, confusion, or unrealistic expectations among the stakeholders regarding the product being built.

E. The Product Owner has not been interacting frequently with the stakeholders and kept them aware of the progress of the project. This is also a possible factor that may have led to the disappointment and anger of the stakeholders. The Product Owner is responsible for engaging with the stakeholders regularly and communicating the value, scope, and status of the product development. The Product Owner should also seek feedback from the stakeholders and incorporate it into the Product Backlog refinement and ordering. If the Product Owner does not interact frequently with the stakeholders, they may feel disconnected, ignored, or dissatisfied with the product being built.

References:

• The Scrum Guide, section 2.3 (The Scrum Team), page 7
• The Scrum Guide, section 3.6 (The Sprint Review), page 11
• The Scrum Guide, section 4.1 (The Product Backlog), page 11
• The Scrum Master Learning Path, module 2 (The Scrum Framework), lesson 5 (The Sprint Review) and lesson 6 (The Sprint Retrospective)

• B: Productivity, in terms of lines of code or story points, will probably suffer during the transition, although even then delivery of business value is still likely to increase. This is a realistic expectation, as the teams will need to learn new skills, collaborate more effectively, and adapt to changing requirements. However, the benefit of feature teams is that they can deliver working software that provides value to the customers and stakeholders every Sprint, rather than waiting for the integration of different components.
• C: Feature teams will require time to become productive as people from the different layers and components become accustomed to working and delivering unified functionality together, as one Scrum Team. This is a natural consequence of changing the team structure and culture, as the teams will need to overcome some challenges and conflicts, build trust and rapport, and establish a shared vision and goal. The Scrum Master can help the teams with this transition by facilitating communication, coaching, and mentoring.

References:

• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 17: “Feature teams are cross-functional teams that can deliver end-to-end functionality for a product. They have all the skills and competencies needed to work on multiple layers of the system.”
• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 18: “Component teams are teams that specialize in one layer or component of the system. They often depend on other teams to deliver a complete functionality for a product.”
• Professional Scrum Master II Course, page 19: “Feature teams have many advantages over component teams, such as faster feedback, higher quality, lower complexity, and more customer value.”