Product Burndown Chart

Correct Answer: The development team removed a large story or epic from the sprint

In Scrum, the Product Burndown Chart shows the amount of work remaining in a Sprint, typically in terms of 'story points'. A steep decline in the middle of the sprint typically indicates that a significant amount of work was suddenly considered 'done'. The most probable scenario for this to occur is if 'The development team removed a large story or epic from the sprint' - this would result in a big drop as a large story or epic would normally carry a significant number of story points. The other possible answers would not lead to a steep decline. Adding extra hours to the workday, increasing story points, or adding a team member would not instantaneously reduce the remaining work seen on the burndown chart.

Correct Answer: The product backlog items aren't being worked upon or completed

A flat Product Burndown Chart over several sprints suggests that no significant progress is being made on the product backlog items. This means that either the team isn't working on the items or they are not able to complete any. The other possibilities wouldn't necessarily lead to a flat burndown chart. If the sprint duration is too long, it might actually show a declining trend overtime due to increased inefficiency. Similarly, a well-managed project or a team working at maximum efficiency should ideally show a downward trend, indicating progress on the backlog. Therefore, the most likely reason is that the product backlog items aren't being worked upon or completed.

Correct Answer: There are still some remaining product backlog items at the end of the sprint

The primary reason that a product burndown chart doesn't reach zero at the end of a sprint could be due to remaining product backlog items. This implies that not all the tasks planned for the sprint got completed, which is why the burndown chart, which monitors work completed, could not reach zero. The suggestion that the team members are working too slow incorrectly assumes that velocity is a problem, not taking into account the complexity or potential impediments in the sprint. The idea that the chart wasn’t updated properly is also incorrect as it shifts the blame to the representation of the data instead of focusing on the work completion process. Lastly, having too many developers in the team is not necessarily a problem since having more members can also mean more work getting done. It is the balance and coordination, along with the nature of tasks, that primarily determine the work completion, not just the team size.