Sprint Planning and Monitoring

Correct Answer: Discuss with the Product Owner the impacts of adding requirements to sprint backlog items, emphasizing the importance of respecting the Sprint Goal.

The role of a Scrum Master includes facilitating communication and understanding between the Product Owner and the Development Team. Discussing the impacts of adding requirements highlights the Scrum principle of maintaining a sustainable pace and respecting the agreed-upon Sprint Goal. Suggesting to pause the sprint or re-planning violates the Scrum principle of time-boxing and sprint integrity. Advocating for a flexible Definition of Done undermines the consistency and predictability of the team's output. The lengthy wrong answer emphasizes backlog refinement as a prevention strategy, which is not directly addressing the issue of changing requirements mid-sprint but is a common misconception as an immediate solution.

Correct Answer: Encourage the team to commit to fewer User Stories during Sprint Planning

The correct approach as a Scrum Master is to guide the team towards committing to a workable amount of User Stories based on their past performance (velocity) and current capacity. This ensures that the team doesn't overcommit and can achieve the Sprint Goal. Suggesting the Product Owner to prioritize higher story points does not address the root cause of overestimation. Instructing the team to break down User Stories into smaller tasks may help in better understanding and estimation but doesn't directly address overcommitment. Implementing a hybrid Agile model is not a direct solution to the problem of overestimation, and such a recommendation would require careful consideration of its impact on the team and the project, and is out of scope for addressing the immediate issue of overestimation during Sprint Planning.

Correct Answer: Collaborate with the team to reassess and adjust the Definition of Done to be more attainable.

As a Scrum Master, facilitating the team's self-management and continuous improvement is crucial. The correct approach involves collaborating with the team to review and potentially adjust the Definition of Done if it is found to be unattainable. This ensures that the team’s standards for what it means to be 'Done' with work items are realistic and achievable, promoting a sustainable pace and enhancing the quality of work over time. Insisting on an unattainable Definition of Done can demoralize the team and affect productivity negatively. Assigning the task to a single member does not utilize the collective wisdom of the team and undermines self-organization. Recommending task splitting without addressing the core issue of an unrealistic Definition of Done doesn't resolve the underlying problem and could lead to decreased transparency and quality.