Question 63 - PSM II discussion

As a Scrum Master, you are accountable for establishing an environment where the Scrum Team can be effective and deliver valuable products1.One of the ways to do this is by supporting the Product Owner in managing the Product Backlog and engaging with the stakeholders2. In this situation, where there is a performance issue with the product, your best option is:

Encourage the Product Owner to bring the performance concerns to the rest of the Scrum Team and work together to improve the Definition of Done.This option aligns with the principle of empiricism, which is the foundation of Scrum3.Empiricism means that you make decisions based on what is known, rather than what is assumed or predicted3.By encouraging the Product Owner to bring the performance concerns to the rest of the Scrum Team, you are helping them inspect the product Increment and adapt the Product Backlog based on transparent feedback from the stakeholder4. You are also helping them collaborate on improving the Definition of Done, which is a shared understanding of what it means for a product Increment to be complete and potentially releasable. The Definition of Done should reflect the quality standards and expectations of the stakeholders, and should be updated as needed to ensure that the product meets their needs and delivers value.

The other options are not advisable because:

Wait to bring this up in the next Sprint Retrospective as this is the appropriate time for the Developers to re-consider the Definition of Done.This option is incorrect because it contradicts your accountability as a Scrum Master. The Sprint Retrospective is an opportunity for the Scrum Team to reflect on their performance and identify improvements for the next Sprint. However, it is not the only time for them to inspect and adapt their product and process.As a Scrum Master, you should promote continuous improvement and help the Scrum Team address any issues or impediments as soon as they arise1. Waiting to bring this up in the next Sprint Retrospective would mean delaying feedback and action, which can lead to waste or dissatisfaction.

Bring the concern to the quality assurance members of the Scrum Team and ask them to improve how the system is tested.This option is incorrect because it goes against your role as a facilitator, who helps the participants have constructive and respectful conversations. By bringing the concern to only a subset of the Scrum Team, you are creating silos and excluding others from contributing or learning. You are also implying that quality is only their responsibility, rather than a shared accountability of the whole Scrum Team. Moreover, you are not asking them for their input or feedback, but telling them what to do, which can undermine their autonomy and motivation.

Explain to the Product Owner that it is up to the Developers to decide on acceptable performance standards as they own the Definition of Done.This option is incorrect because it contradicts your role as a coach, who helps people grow and improve their skills and behaviors. By explaining to the Product Owner that it is up to the Developers to decide on acceptable performance standards, you are dismissing their concern and creating a gap between them and the Developers. You are also ignoring their valuable perspective and input as a stakeholder representative, who has a clear vision of what value means for the product. Instead of explaining, you should be asking questions and listening actively, and facilitating a dialogue between them and the Developers.