Close or Osmotic Communication

Correct Answer: Have split sessions where essential communication is still osmotic but less daunting for junior members

The best answer is 'Have split sessions where essential communication is still osmotic but less daunting for junior members'. This approach recognizes the value of osmotic communication, which fosters effortless knowledge absorption, while also taking into consideration the comfort level and capacity of the junior team members. This facilitates effective information flow without overwhelm hence enhancing team productivity in the high stress project closure. As for the other answers:- 'Continue with the same strategy and hope the junior members catch up' is not a proactive solution, as it could result in further stress and knowledge gap among the junior team members- 'Exclude junior members from osmotic communication sessions' would withhold crucial project information from the junior members, which is against the collaborative and transparent principles of Agile methodologies- 'Focus only on written forms of communication' could impede the holistic understanding of project requirements as it eliminates the opportunity for spontaneous queries/clarifications and discussions that oral communication sessions offer.

Correct Answer: The Project Manager should organize a feedback session with the team where everyone can voice their concerns, understand the feedback, and work collectively on its resolution.

In an Agile project, feedback from stakeholders is highly valuable and should never be ignored. The correct course of action when receiving critical feedback is for the Project Manager to organize a feedback session where the team is able to voice their concerns, understand the feedback, and collectively work on a resolution. A Project Manager ignoring the stress or withholding feedback from the team is a counterproductive practice, as it hinders the team's ability to respond and adapt to changes, a key principle of Agile. Also, scrapping the whole project and starting from scratch because of some critical feedback is an extreme measure and typically not efficient or practical. This would only make sense in exceptional cases where the feedback reveals fundamental flaws that cannot be addressed within the existing project. Therefore, the best course of action is to facilitate open and transparent communication, a stance that aligns with the Agile principle of osmotic communication.

Correct Answer: The team should improve their coordination with external stakeholders, and possibly review and update the Definition of Done.

In the Agile methodology, dependencies must be carefully coordinated so as not to disrupt the sprint's flow or timelines. Thus, when a team faces consistent delays due to external dependencies, improving coordination with the individuals or teams responsible for these external dependencies becomes a priority. This might involve updating the Definition of Done to include clearer expectations or checkpoints for these external dependencies, reducing the chance of unexpected delays. Moreover, having these external dependencies within the team ('Owning these external dependencies by bringing those within the team') might be a possible solution, but it could also introduce other complications, such as resource allocation and skill gaps. On the other hand, extending the sprint length to account for delays ('Increasing the length of the sprint to account for delays') is generally against Agile principles, as it may lead to inefficiencies and delays becoming the norm. Lastly, blaming external stakeholders ('Assigning blame to external stakeholders') is counterproductive and opposes the Agile principle of collaboration.