Scrum Sprint Review

Correct Answer: Assertively facilitate the review to keep the focus on product increments and goals, and address the micromanagement issue later.

The best course of action when stakeholders are micromanaging the team during the sprint review is to 'Assertively facilitate the review to keep the focus on product increments and goals, and address the micromanagement issue later.' This is essentially the role of a Scrum Master. The Scrum Master is there to protect the team from overzealous stakeholders and deflect any unnecessary pressure. They need to ensure that the sprint review meeting is focused on inspecting the work done during the sprint and deciding what to do in the next sprint. As for the other choices: 'Invite the stakeholders to participate in daily scrum meetings instead' - this is incorrect because daily scrum is meant for the development team, not the stakeholders. It will be counterproductive to invite them. 'Send a formal letter of complaint to the senior stakeholders' - Scrum promotes face-to-face communication and transparency. It would be better to discuss the issues openly rather than sending a formal complaint. 'Encourage team members to solve it by themselves' - While team members should be capable of defending their progress, it is primarily the Scrum Master's responsibility to safeguard the team from external interruptions or pressure.

Correct Answer: Explain to the stakeholder to add this modification request to the product backlog for it to be prioritized

The best course of action as a Scrum Master when a stakeholder proposes a large change is to 'Explain to the stakeholder to add this modification request to the product backlog for it to be prioritized'. This is because incorporating the change immediately without considering its impact on the project (as suggested in the answer that suggests immediate implementation) could lead to scope creep and adversely affect the project's progress and timelines. Meanwhile, outright rejecting or ignoring the proposal (as suggested in another answer) contradicts the principle of Stakeholder Engagement in Scrum, which emphasizes on considering inputs from all stakeholders. The approach of confronting the stakeholder with an accusation of attempting to introduce scope creep (as mentioned in another answer) is also inappropriate, as it may strain the relationship with the stakeholder. Therefore, the right action would be to transfer the change request to the product backlog, so that it can be properly evaluated and prioritized in terms of the value it brings to the project and the effort it requires.

Correct Answer: Insist on rescheduling the review to a time when the Product Owner can be present.

The best response is to insist on rescheduling the review to a time when the Product Owner can be present. In Scrum, the Product Owner's role in the Sprint Review is essential as they are responsible for accepting or rejecting work results, and they provide critical feedback that can influence future sprints. Other choices are not appropriate for a Scrum Master's response. Continuing the review and summarizing it for the Product Owner afterwards would deny the team of necessary immediate feedback; asking a team member to impersonate the Product Owner does not guarantee valid input as the Product Owner has a unique perspective and responsibilities; and cancelling the review and moving directly to the next sprint would skip a vital process in Scrum methodology which is retrospectively inspecting the past sprint to find possible improvements for the next sprint.