Scrum@Scale Framework

Correct Answer: Reflect on the reasons why the meeting took too long and adjust the process accordingly for the next time

As a Scrum master, the primary duty is to ensure that the agile practices are being followed effectively. When a Sprint planning meeting takes more time than expected, it shows possible issues with the process, like unclear requirements or ineffective communication. The best action is to reflect on why the meeting took too long and modify the process accordingly for the future. This is a proactive and constructive approach and aims to improve the efficiency of future meetings. Canceling other meetings for the day is not a solution because it might lead to missing out on important tasks. It's a reactive approach and doesn't address the root problem. Ignoring the issue and hoping it to resolve on its own is also not advisable, as it opposes the entire philosophy of Agile and Scrum, which is about continuous improvement. Blaming team members for the extended meeting time is also not the right approach because it's the responsibility of all team members, including the Scrum master, to ensure effective meetings. There can be multiple reasons apart from the team members extending the meeting time such as unclear requirements, not having the right people in the meeting etc. So, blaming is not a solution, instead the Scrum master should work together with the team to understand the problem and resolve it.

Correct Answer: Facilitate a discussion between the two individuals to encourage them to resolve their differences

The best action for a Scrum Master in this situation is to 'Facilitate a discussion between the two individuals to encourage them to resolve their differences'. Scrum Masters are servant leaders who try to resolve conflicts by helping team members find solutions themselves. Therefore, they facilitate discussions between team members in conflict rather than giving orders or making decisions for them. If we discuss the other options, 'ignoring the conflict, as it's a personal matter' would not be constructive as unresolved conflicts can hamper team productivity. 'Taking sides with the individual from your team' contradicts the role of Scrum Master, as they are supposed to be neutral facilitators. Lastly, 'requesting management intervention at the first sign of conflict' would be a last resort, as Scrum encourages self-organizing teams and solving conflicts internally first.

Correct Answer: Establish a Product Owner Cycle to align backlog priorities and resolve dependencies

The best answer is to establish a Product Owner Cycle to align backlog priorities and resolve dependencies. In Scrum@Scale, when multiple teams are working on a single product, it's crucial for the Product Owners to collaborate effectively to maintain a unified product vision. The Product Owner Cycle provides a forum for the Product Owners to synchronize their efforts, discuss and prioritize backlogs, and address any dependencies or conflicts between the teams. This ensures that all teams are working towards the same goals and that the overall product vision remains coherent. Merging all Product Owners into a single role would undermine the autonomy and focus of individual teams, while having each Product Owner independently manage their team's backlog without coordination would lead to a fragmented product vision and potential conflicts. Relying solely on top-down guidance from the Executive MetaScrum would not provide sufficient collaboration and alignment at the Product Owner level.