Understanding and Applying the Scrum Framework

Advanced application of empiricism, Scrum values, roles, events, and artifacts in complex situations.

5 minutes 5 Questions

Understanding and Applying the Scrum Framework is a core competency area for Professional Scrum Master II (PSM II) certification. It goes beyond basic knowledge of Scrum and focuses on the deeper understanding of why Scrum works, how its elements interrelate, and how to apply it effectively in comp…

Concepts covered
Sprint Planning and the Sprint GoalSprint Review and Stakeholder FeedbackScrum Team Dynamics and Self-ManagementDaily Scrum and Adapting the Sprint BacklogProduct Backlog, Sprint Backlog, and IncrementUpholding the Definition of DoneEmpiricism and Scrum Values in PracticeSprint Retrospective and Continuous Improvement
Test mode:
Start practice test

PSM II - Understanding and Applying the Scrum Framework Example Questions

Test your knowledge of Understanding and Applying the Scrum Framework

Question 1

According to the Scrum Guide, what is the relationship between self-management and accountability within a Scrum Team?

Correct Answer: Self-managing teams choose how to accomplish their work and are accountable as a whole team for their commitments

The Scrum Guide states that Scrum Teams are self-managing, meaning they internally decide who does what, when, and how, and they are collectively accountable for creating a valuable, useful Increment each Sprint.

Delegating accountability to individual members contradicts the collective ownership principle of Scrum Teams. Sharing accountability with the Scrum Master misrepresents the Scrum Master's role, which is to serve the team and organization rather than co-own delivery commitments. Distributing accountability across the three accountabilities (Product Owner, Scrum Master, Developers) in a segmented way undermines the concept of whole-team accountability for outcomes.

Key concept tested: collective team accountability paired with self-management as defined in the Scrum Guide.

Question 2

A Scrum Team uses a Definition of Done containing a required security scan for a legacy database. Early in the Sprint, the Developers realize the product connects solely to a new cloud architecture, rendering the legacy scan obsolete. The developers ask the Scrum Master how to proceed with the items they are building. How should the Scrum Master guide the team in this situation?

Correct Answer: Suggest the Developers fulfill the remaining relevant criteria for the current Increment and review the standard for adaptation during the upcoming Sprint Retrospective.

The correct approach is to guide the team to continue building the Increment using all applicable quality criteria while waiting to formally update the Definition of Done during the Sprint Retrospective.
Allowing the Product Owner to mandate substituted security practices is incorrect because the Developers are responsible for instilling technical quality. Authorizing checklist alterations is also outside the scope of the Product Owner accountability. Instructing the team to pause ongoing work until an external governance board approves a new checklist destroys continuous value delivery and violates team self management.
Key concept tested: Adapting the Definition of Done.

Question 3

A Scrum Team has strong commitment to Sprint Goals and consistently delivers Done Increments. However, during a Retrospective, a Developer privately tells the Scrum Master that two team members frequently disagree on technical approaches but suppress their concerns during team discussions to maintain harmony. Sprint velocity remains stable. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master?

Correct Answer: Facilitate a safe environment where the team can openly discuss differing technical perspectives, reinforcing that healthy conflict supports better inspection and adaptation

The Scrum Master should foster psychological safety so that differing technical perspectives can surface openly, because suppressed conflict undermines true transparency and limits the team's ability to inspect and adapt effectively, even when velocity appears stable.

Stable velocity does not mean the team is healthy; artificial harmony masks deeper issues and prevents better solutions from emerging. Coaching individuals privately to resolve disagreements before bringing them to the team undermines team self-management and transparency. Raising suppressed disagreements during Sprint Planning is inappropriate because it violates the Developer's trust and misuses the event's purpose.

Key concept tested: the Scrum Master's role in cultivating psychological safety, transparency, and healthy conflict as enablers of empiricism.

More Understanding and Applying the Scrum Framework questions
613 questions (total)
Practice 100 questions
One session at a time, always new questions