PSPO PSPO-II Release Date

According to the Professional Scrum Product Owner™ II guide, one of the key competencies of a Product Owner is to validate product assumptions and hypotheses using empirical evidence1. This means that instead of investing a lot of money and time into building a product based on unproven ideas, the Product Owner should conduct small experiments to test the viability, desirability, and feasibility of the product2. These experiments can take various forms, such as prototypes, mockups, surveys, interviews, landing pages, etc. The goal is to gather feedback from real or potential users and customers, and measure the outcomes against predefined success criteria3. Based on the results of the experiments, the Product Owner can then decide whether to persevere, pivot, or terminate the product idea4. This approach helps to reduce the risk of wasting resources on products that nobody wants or needs, and to focus on the most valuable and promising ideas.

Sharing people with unique skills across multiple teams will likely result in teams having to wait more often for those people to be available, impeding the delivery of value. This is because those people will have to context-switch between different teams, products, and domains, reducing their focus and efficiency1. Moreover, sharing people with unique skills will create bottlenecks and dependencies in the delivery process, increasing the risk of delays and quality issues2. Furthermore, sharing people with unique skills will discourage teams from developing deep technical skills themselves, making them less cross-functional and self-organizing3. Therefore, the best answer is A.

The other options are not correct because:

• B. Teams do not have to develop deep technical skills. This is not a desirable condition, as it contradicts the Scrum value of commitment and the principle of continuous improvement. Teams should strive to develop deep technical skills to deliver high-quality products and to respond to changing requirements and technologies4.
• C. Costs are lower since expensive resources are shared. This is not necessarily true, as the costs of context-switching, waiting, and quality issues may outweigh the benefits of sharing resources. Moreover, this option implies a resource-oriented mindset, rather than a value-oriented mindset, which is not aligned with the Scrum framework and the Product Owner role5.
• D. More work gets done since people are better utilized. This is not a valid measure of success, as the amount of work done does not reflect the value delivered. Moreover, this option implies a utilization-oriented mindset, rather than an outcome-oriented mindset, which is not aligned with the Scrum framework and the Product Owner role. References: 1: Context Switching, 2: Bottlenecks and Dependencies, 3: Cross-Functional Teams, 4: Technical Excellence, 5: Resource vs. Value Orientation, : Utilization vs. Outcome Orientation

= As a Product Owner, you are accountable for maximizing the value of the product and the work of the Developers. To do this, you need to have a clear vision of the product and its target users, as well as a validated understanding of the market opportunities and risks. You also need to collaborate with stakeholders and customers to align their expectations and feedback with the product goals and strategy.

In this scenario, you face a dilemma between pursuing a new market segment or satisfying the existing customers. Both options have potential value, but also uncertainty and trade-offs. The best way to proceed is to devise an experiment that will help you to test your assumptions and learn more about the new market and its potential. This could be a small-scale release, a prototype, a survey, or any other method that can provide you with empirical evidence and feedback. By doing this, you can reduce the risk of investing in a feature that may not deliver the expected value, and also gain insights that can help you to refine your product vision and backlog.

This approach is consistent with the principles of agile product management, which emphasize delivering value early and often, validating hypotheses with data, and adapting to changing customer needs and market conditions. It also demonstrates your ability to apply the Scrum values of openness, courage, and respect, as you are willing to explore new possibilities, challenge your own opinions, and involve your stakeholders and customers in the decision-making process. References := Scrum Guide, Managing Products with Agility, Evidence-Based Management

According to the Scrum Guide, the purpose of the Sprint Retrospective is to plan ways to increase quality and effectiveness. The Scrum Team inspects how the last Sprint went with regards to individuals, interactions, processes, tools, and their Definition of Done1. Therefore, all of the options A, B, C, and D are possible topics that the Scrum Team might discuss during a Sprint Retrospective, as they relate to the aspects that the team can improve or adapt. For example, the team might discuss how to communicate better, how to plan the Sprint more effectively, how to acquire new skills or knowledge, or how to update their Definition of Done23. The Sprint Retrospective is a formal opportunity for the team to focus on inspection and adaptation, and to identify the most helpful changes to implement in the next Sprint1.