Most Recent Scrum SPS Exam Dumps

The best answer for this question is A. Integrating more frequently. This answer is correct because integrating more frequently can help the Scrum Teams in a Nexus to detect and resolve integration issues or dependencies earlier and faster, and to deliver a potentially releasable product increment at the end of each Sprint. Integrating more frequently can also reduce the complexity and risk of integration, and increase the quality and feedback of value delivery 112233.

The other answers are not correct for the following reasons:

B . Doing more acceptance testing. This answer is not sufficient because doing more acceptance testing does not address the root cause of the problem, which is the late integration of the work. Acceptance testing can help to verify the quality and functionality of the product increment, but it does not ensure that the integration is done early and often. Moreover, doing more acceptance testing may consume more time and resources, and delay the delivery of the product increment 44.

C . Doing more exploratory testing. This answer is not helpful because doing more exploratory testing does not solve the issue of the late integration of the work. Exploratory testing can help to discover and learn more about the product increment, but it does not guarantee that the integration is done smoothly and quickly. Furthermore, doing more exploratory testing may introduce more uncertainty and variability, and hinder the delivery of the product increment 55.

D . Using Behavior-Driven Development. This answer is not relevant because using Behavior-Driven Development does not directly affect the integration of the work. Behavior-Driven Development is a technique that can help to define and communicate the expected behavior and outcomes of the product increment, but it does not ensure that the integration is done frequently and effectively. Additionally, using Behavior-Driven Development may require more collaboration and coordination, and complicate the delivery of the product increment [6].

E . Investing in more Requirements Traceability. This answer is not useful because investing in more Requirements Traceability does not improve the integration of the work. Requirements Traceability is a practice that can help to track and document the origin and evolution of the product requirements, but it does not ensure that the integration is done timely and efficiently. Also, investing in more Requirements Traceability may increase the overhead and bureaucracy, and slow down the delivery of the product increment [7].

F . All of the above. This answer is not correct because none of the above answers are effective for addressing the issue of the late integration of the work. As explained above, each of the above answers has its own limitations and drawbacks, and does not directly or sufficiently help the Scrum Teams in a Nexus to integrate their work more frequently and successfully. Therefore, the best answer is A. Integrating more frequently.

The best way to improve the ability of the Scrum Teams in a Nexus to produce an Increment for the next Sprint is to reduce the amount of work that the teams pull into the Sprint. This will allow the teams to focus on delivering a high-quality and valuable product Increment that meets the Definition of Done and the Product Goal. Reducing the amount of work also reduces the complexity and dependencies among the teams, which makes integration easier and faster.

The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:

Asking the Nexus Integration Team to extend the Sprint to allow more time for integration is not consistent with the Scrum principles and values. The Sprint length should be fixed and consistent throughout the product development, and it should be less than a month. Extending the Sprint would compromise the feedback loop, the transparency, and the adaptability of the Nexus 11.

Reducing the number of Scrum Teams to reduce complexity is not a viable solution, as it would also reduce the capacity and the productivity of the Nexus. The number of Scrum Teams in a Nexus should be based on the size and the scope of the product, and it should not exceed nine teams 11. Reducing the number of teams would also disrupt the existing team dynamics and collaboration.

Adding another Scrum Team to the Nexus to increase capacity is not a good idea, as it would increase the complexity and the dependencies among the teams. Adding another team would also require more coordination and communication, which would consume more time and resources. Moreover, adding another team would not necessarily increase the value or the quality of the product Increment 22.

Using Scrum does not ensure that adding more resources to a product delivery effort proportionally increases the value delivered. In fact, adding more resources may have the opposite effect, as it can introduce more complexity, communication overhead, coordination challenges, and integration issues that can reduce the productivity and quality of the Scrum Teams 12. Scrum does not prescribe a specific team size or composition, but it does recommend that the Scrum Team is small enough to remain nimble and large enough to complete significant work within a Sprint 3. Scrum also emphasizes the importance of delivering a potentially releasable increment of the product at least once per Sprint, which enables the Scrum Team and the stakeholders to inspect the value delivered and adapt accordingly 4. Therefore, using Scrum does not guarantee that adding more resources will increase the value delivered, but rather that delivering value frequently and incrementally will optimize the value delivery.

The Nexus Sprint Review is an event where the Nexus, consisting of multiple Scrum Teams, presents the Integrated Increment to the stakeholders for inspection and feedback 1. The Integrated Increment is the sum of all the work done by the Scrum Teams in a Sprint that meets the Definition of Done 1. The purpose of the Nexus Sprint Review is to inspect the outcome of the Sprint, discuss the progress toward the Product Goal, discuss any changes in the environment, and collaborate on what to do next 2.

In Scenario A, the Nexus Sprint Review is not conducted effectively. The teams are not using a shared environment to demonstrate the Integrated Increment, but rather showing their individual work. This means that the stakeholders cannot see the whole product and how it works together. The teams are also delaying the integration of their work, which can lead to quality issues, technical debt, and increased complexity 1. The stakeholders do not provide much feedback, which means that the Nexus cannot adapt to the changing needs and expectations of the customers and users. The event ends without any clear outcomes or next steps.

If this pattern continues for multiple Sprints, the effects may be:

Quality will degrade as the teams delay creating a single Integrated Increment. This is answer B. By not integrating their work frequently and continuously, the teams will face more challenges and risks in ensuring that the product is functional, reliable, and usable. The teams will also miss the opportunity to validate their assumptions and learn from the feedback on the Integrated Increment 1.

Ability to adapt will suffer as the stakeholders continue to disengage and not give feedback. This is answer D. By not engaging the stakeholders in a meaningful dialogue and collaboration, the Nexus will lose the insight and direction that the feedback provides. The Nexus will also risk building the wrong product or features that do not meet the needs and expectations of the customers and users. The stakeholders will also lose trust and confidence in the Nexus and the product 2.

The other two answers are not correct because:

There will be more and more work to inspect so teams will need their own individual Sprint Reviews. This is answer A. This is not a valid effect because the Nexus Sprint Review replaces the individual Scrum Team Sprint Reviews 1. The Nexus Sprint Review is not a time for each team to present their work, but rather for the Nexus to present the Integrated Increment. The teams should not need their own Sprint Reviews, but rather focus on integrating their work and delivering a valuable product 1.

Empiricism will suffer as the teams cannot produce a shared velocity. This is answer C. This is not a valid effect because velocity is not a measure of empiricism. Empiricism is the principle of making decisions based on observation, inspection, and adaptation 1. Velocity is a measure of the amount of work done by a team or a Nexus in a Sprint. Velocity is not a mandatory artifact or metric in Scrum or Nexus, and it does not reflect the quality or value of the work done 1.

The true statements regarding using Scrum for large-scale product delivery are:

A . Splitting a team member's time between multiple Scrum Teams is often less productive than focusing that team member on a single team's Sprint Backlog. This statement is true because splitting a team member's time between multiple teams can cause context switching, communication overhead, coordination challenges, and reduced commitment and accountability. It can also reduce the team's ability to self-organize and deliver a potentially releasable product increment at the end of each Sprint. Therefore, it is recommended that team members focus on one team's Sprint Backlog and work as a cross-functional and cohesive unit 1122.

D . A well-structured and refined Product Backlog can minimize and often eliminate dependencies between multiple Scrum Teams working together on a product during a Sprint. This statement is true because a well-structured and refined Product Backlog can help the Product Owner and the Scrum Teams to identify and prioritize the most valuable and feasible work items, and to decompose them into smaller and independent pieces that can be delivered by one or more teams. This can reduce the complexity and risk of integration and dependency management, and increase the flow and quality of value delivery 3344.

The other statements are false for the following reasons:

B . Scrum requires all team members work full time on a single team. This statement is false because Scrum does not prescribe how team members allocate their time or effort. Scrum only defines the roles, events, artifacts, and rules that guide the empirical process of product development. However, as mentioned above, it is often more productive and effective for team members to focus on one team's Sprint Backlog and avoid splitting their time between multiple teams [5].

C . Changes to the core Scrum framework are needed to be successful with Scrum at large-scale. This statement is false because Scrum is a lightweight and adaptable framework that can be applied to any complex product development context, regardless of the size or scale. Scrum does not need to be changed or modified to be successful at large-scale, but rather scaled up or down according to the needs and goals of the product organization. There are various frameworks and approaches that can help scale Scrum, such as Nexus, LeSS, SAFe, and Scrum@Scale, but they all adhere to the core principles and values of Scrum [6] [7].