Scrum SPS Dumps

When multiple Scrum Teams work from the same Product Backlog, they should choose the Product Backlog items that they can deliver as part of an Integrated Increment, which is the combined work of all the Scrum Teams that meets the Nexus Sprint Goal 11. The Developers, who are the people in the Scrum Teams who are accountable for creating and delivering the Increment, should pull work in agreement with the Product Owner, who is the person who is accountable for maximizing the value of the product and the work performed and integrated by the Scrum Teams 11. The Developers and the Product Owner should collaborate to select the Product Backlog items that are most valuable, feasible, and aligned with the Nexus Sprint Goal 2233. Therefore, statement B is the correct answer.

Statement A is incorrect because it implies that the Scrum Teams choose the Weighted Shortest Job First, which is a prioritization technique that ranks Product Backlog items based on their value and cost 44. However, the Scrum Guide does not prescribe any specific technique for ordering the Product Backlog, and the Product Owner is the sole person responsible for managing the Product Backlog [5]. Statement C is incorrect because it suggests that each Scrum Team takes an equal number of items, which may not reflect the value, complexity, or dependencies of the items 1122. Statement D is incorrect because it assumes that the Scrum Team with the highest velocity pulls Product Backlog items first, which may not be the best way to optimize the value delivery and integration across the Nexus 1122. Statement E is incorrect because it proposes that the Product Owner should provide each team with its own Product Backlog, which would create confusion, inconsistency, and duplication of work. Having multiple Product Backlogs would also undermine the transparency and alignment that are essential for scaling Scrum 1122.

PBI 2 is the most concerning because it involves a cross-team dependency within the same Sprint, which can create challenges and risks for the integration and delivery of the product increment. According to the Online Nexus Guide1, dependencies should be minimized or eliminated as much as possible, and if they exist, they should be made transparent and resolved as early as possible. Cross-team dependencies within the same Sprint can cause delays, conflicts, rework, and waste, and reduce the quality and value of the product increment 234.

The other answers are not correct for the following reasons:

• A. PBI 2, because it has the most dependencies. This answer is not accurate because PBI 2 does not have the most dependencies, but only one dependency with PBI 1 from Team Red. PBI 3 has the most dependencies, as it depends on PBI 1, PBI 2, and PBI 4. However, PBI 3 is not as concerning as PBI 2, because its dependencies are not within the same Sprint, but across different Sprints. This means that PBI 3 can be refined and planned in advance, and the teams can coordinate and communicate their work more effectively 5.
• B. PBI 1, because it is on the top of the Product Backlog. This answer is not relevant because the position of PBI 1 on the Product Backlog does not indicate its level of concern, but its priority and value. The Product Backlog is ordered by the Product Owner based on various factors, such as business value, risk, complexity, and dependencies. PBI 1 may be on the top of the Product Backlog because it is the most valuable or urgent item, or because it is a prerequisite for other items, but it is not necessarily the most concerning item 6.
• C. PBI 1, because it is the first piece of work with a dependency. This answer is not true because PBI 1 is not the first piece of work with a dependency, but the first piece of work that other items depend on. PBI 1 does not have any dependencies itself, but it creates dependencies for PBI 2, PBI 3, and PBI 5. Therefore, PBI 1 is not as concerning as PBI 2, because it does not depend on any other item, and it can be completed independently by Team Red 5.

Moving away from component teams toward feature teams is a significant change that should be considered carefully. Here are some of the factors that should be taken into account:

• Feature teams have less communication overhead than component teams, as they are able to deliver end-to-end customer features without relying on other teams or components 11. This reduces the complexity and the dependencies among the teams, and improves the transparency and the feedback loop. Feature teams also foster more collaboration and cross-functional learning among the team members, as they have to work on different aspects of the product 22.
• When making this change, it helps to have support from the organization, as it may require a shift in the culture, the structure, and the processes of the company 33. The organization should provide the necessary resources, training, and coaching to the teams to help them adopt the feature team model. The organization should also align its goals, incentives, and metrics with the feature team approach, and remove any barriers or impediments that may hinder the teams’ performance 44.
• Productivity may decrease when making this kind of change, as the teams may face some challenges and difficulties in the transition period 55. For example, the teams may have to learn new skills, technologies, or domains that they are not familiar with. The teams may also have to deal with legacy code, technical debt, or integration issues that may slow down their delivery. The teams may also experience some resistance or conflict from the existing component teams or stakeholders. Therefore, the teams should expect some temporary setbacks and losses in productivity, and focus on continuous improvement and adaptation.

The other options are not correct for the following reasons:

• With feature teams, it is not easier to calculate the productivity per team, as productivity is not a simple or straightforward metric to measure in software development [6]. Productivity depends on various factors, such as the quality, the value, the complexity, and the customer satisfaction of the product. Moreover, focusing on the productivity per team may create a competitive or individualistic mindset among the teams, rather than a collaborative or collective one. The teams should focus on delivering the best possible product Increment that meets the Product Goal and the Definition of Done, rather than on maximizing their productivity [7].
• You can do Scrum without feature teams, as Scrum does not prescribe any specific team structure or organization [8]. Scrum only requires that the Scrum Team is cross-functional, self-organizing, and accountable for delivering a potentially releasable product Increment every Sprint [9]. However, feature teams are generally more aligned with the Scrum values and principles, as they enable the teams to deliver customer-centric features faster and more frequently, and to respond to changes more effectively [10]. Therefore, feature teams are recommended, but not mandatory, for Scrum.