Iterative Development

Correct Answer: Evaluate the cost versus benefit of the new design. If the change adds significant value to the end product, consider incorporating the change in the next iteration.

As a product manager, you need to balance between adhering to the project goal, deadlines and incorporating changes that might enhance the outcome. The best way to handle the situation when a team member suggests a significant design change midway through the process is to evaluate the cost and benefit of the new design. You need to consider how much rework will be required, how it will affect the timeline and whether the expected improvement in output is worth the additional work. If the change makes sense to be implemented and if it's adding value, then considering it for the next iteration will be a good approach. However, shifting gears mid-way without an evaluation might disrupt the workflow leading to a potential risk which negates the second answer. Completely ignoring the suggestion as per the third answer could mean possibly ignoring an opportunity for improvement. Leaving the decision entirely on the team member who suggested the change, as stated in the fourth answer, can lead to a lack of broad perspective evaluation and make the team member bear the entire responsibility which is not a good practice.

Correct Answer: Implement daily stand-up meetings

The best practice to improve inter-team coordination in an Iterative Development approach is to implement daily stand-up meetings. In these meetings, each team member can briefly communicate their progress, what they are planning to work on and any possible impediments. This practice helps in identifying and addressing issues in a timely manner, maintaining alignment, transparency and collaboration among the team. Delaying the launch is not productive because it does not necessarily improve coordination. Changing the development approach is not the most feasible solution to addressing coordination issues and should be seen as a last resort. Ignoring the issue is definitely a wrong approach as it could lead to more serious problems down the line.

Correct Answer: Adjusting the team's velocity for the next iteration based on the work actually completed

The best approach when a team is unable to achieve the completion of backlog items during iterative development is adjusting the team's velocity for the next iteration based on the work actually completed. This addresses the problem at its core: if the team cannot complete their work, it suggests that they've been attempting to deliver more than their actual capacity allows. By adjusting velocity, you align expectations with realistic output which can boost morale and improve future planning. The other options have potential negative implications. Increasing the number of working hours could result in burnout and decreased productivity. Reducing the team's size might decrease the capacity even further. Increasing the iteration duration could help, but if the problem is overestimated velocity, this might just prolong the underlying issue.