Team Building and Collaboration

Correct Answer: The Scrum Master should adopt the role of a facilitator, establishing a common ground and mediating the discussions.

The Scrum Master's role in a situation of conflict between the development team and stakeholders should be that of a facilitator. They should mediate the discussions and help in establishing a common ground, rather than taking sides. This helps in keeping the team focused on achieving the goals in the most effective and efficient manner. The Scrum Master siding with either the team or the stakeholders would create a situation of bias, and ignoring the conflicts would lead to unresolved issues and further conflicts. Scrum promotes collaboration and shared understanding, and as a facilitator, the Scrum Master is perfectly positioned to ensure these principles are upheld.

Correct Answer: The Scrum Master should privately discuss with the team member, appreciating their involvement but highlighting the importance of time efficiency.

The most effective solution in case of a team member causing delays by unnecessary debates is for the Scrum Master to have a private conversation with them. By appreciating their active involvement and constructive discussions, the Master can help them understand the importance of keeping the discussions pointed and time-bound. This approach is direct, respectful, and provides a positive reinforcement. The other answers suggest either evasive, hostile, or drastic measures which could lead to negative consequences. Dismissing the member from team is too drastic for such a problem, ignoring the behavior could lead to persistence of the issue, and publicly rebuking the member might seriously affect their motivation and overall team morale. Therefore, all these other options are not ideal or constructive.

Correct Answer: The Scrum Master should explain the 'Brooks' Law' and recommend refining processes or removing impediments instead.

The best advice the Scrum Master can give in this situation is to explain the concept of 'Brooks' Law' to the Product Owner, which articulates that adding more manpower to a late software project tends to make the project later. This is because new members require training and time to understand the project, which usually results in a decrease in productivity. This correct answer suggests focusing on refining existing processes or removing impediments that block the team’s work, which is more in line with Scrum methodology. As for the remaining options - suggesting to immediately add more team members could lead to more delays due to the reasons mentioned above, and it's typically a misconception that more team members would speed up the process. Recommending cancelling the project is an extreme measure and is not justifiable just because the project is behind schedule. Delaying the project can be considered, but it wouldn't solve the underlying issue of why the project is running late; it might simply postpone the problem.