PSPO 1/PSM 1 Types of Questions - Trying to Resolve Some Inconsistencies
I have passed the PSM 1 Exam and I am currently studying for the PSPO 1 Exam. I have the following questions that I am asking from the point of view of what the correct answer would be based on Scrum.Org’s current viewpoint. In some cases, I am getting inconsistent answers from different sources on these questions and I am trying to resolve those inconsistencies:
1) The latest version of the Scrum Guide does not appear to divide the Sprint Planning meeting into 2 separate meetings that are both time-boxed, as it did in the past. It all appears to be one meeting with 1 time-box. Hence, if we have a 2 week Sprint, with a 4 hour time-box for the meeting, and we spend 1 hour on answering the “what” question, we will have 3 hours remaining to answer the “how” question. This is unlike how it would have been with a previous version of the Sprint Guide (I believe the 2009 Version) where you would have 2 separate 2 hour time-boxes, one for Part 1 and another for Part 2. In this case, for a 2 week Sprint, if you spend 1 hour answering the ‘what’ question, you would have only 2 hours to answer the ‘how’ question. Please confirm that the current way of handling this situation is with only 1 time-box, based on my above explanation, having 3 hours available to answer the “how” question, after you used 1 hour to answer the ‘what” question in a 2 week Sprint.
2) Regarding the Daily Scrum, some sources say that the Development Team is allowed to only answer the 3 questions during the meeting and not discuss problems or solutions. Such discussions should occur after the meeting. If there is time within the 15 minute time-box, could other discussions take place, including re-planning discussions? What is the latest viewpoint with respect to this?
3) Some sources say that the Definition of Done can’t change during the Sprint. It would typically change during the Sprint Retrospective. Other sources say it could change at any time to increase quality (as long as the Sprint Goal is not endangered). However, this has an impact to estimates and causes the need to re-plan and lack of focus. What is the latest viewpoint with respect to changes to the Definition of Done during the Sprint? If it could change during the Sprint, are there any specific rules regarding when it could change?
4) Some sources state that there should be no additions, removal or changes to the Sprint Backlog Items after Sprint Planning is completed until the Sprint ends. These sources state the Sprint Backlog is broken down into Sprint Backlog items, selected from the Product Backlog and tasks, which are decomposed from the items and can evolve/change throughout the Sprint. The tasks are what the Scrum Guide refers to as “work” or “scope” or “the plan” and are what could be re-negotiated or adjusted in discussions between the Product Owner and the Development Team. The Sprint Backlog Items are fixed during the Sprint to allow the team to focus and be as productive as possible during the Sprint time-box. While there are limitations on the Sprint Backlog items, the Product Backlog can always change. However, you are able to add items to the Sprint Backlog from the Product Backlog during the Sprint, if all Sprint Backlog Items are complete, and there is still time within the fixed Sprint time-box duration. You could also add more detail or definition to Sprint Backlog Items. Is this the current viewpoint with respect to changes in the Sprint Backlog Items or is there more flexibility? If the Sprint Goal is at risk or an item is not aligned to the Sprint Goal, could you add, change, remove or replace Sprint Backlog Items from the Sprint Backlog, to better meet the Sprint Goal during the Sprint as long as both the Development Team and Product Owner agree? Are there any specific rules regarding what types of changes that could be made to Sprint Backlog Items during the Sprint?
5) Is the Sprint itself considered a feedback loop, enabling a formal opportunity for inspection and adaption, as the 4 other events in Scrum are? Although it appears to be, it is not explicit in the Scrum Guide.
6) Multiple sources state to read the EBMgt Guide to prepare for the PSPO 1 exam because it helps the Product Owner to assess and understand value. This guide links to the ‘Agility Guide to Evidence-Based Change’, which appears to be its own separate framework with roles, artifacts, events and rules. Is the ‘Agility Guide to Evidence-Based Change’ a subject area included in the PSPO 1 Exam?
Please get back to me with answers to my questions.
Thank you,
As these are distinct questions it may be best to post them separately.
I don't have experience with the older version of Scrum, so I'll provide my input on these questions as I learned them.
1) The PSPO I exam reflects the current Scrum Guide. It seems to me that these two questions go hand-in-hand. The more detailed you go into the "what," the easier it is to define the "how." The less elaborate your "what" is, the more clear you need to be in "how" you will accomplish that. Having two distinct timeboxes works against this inter-connectivity between the two concepts, and I suspect that's why it was removed with the guide revision.
2) The Daily Scrum is designed to address status updates and impediments. If replanning is an impediment, it makes sense to at least bring up during the meeting. However, the timebox is firm and if the conversation can't be addressed in a minute or two, it's generally best to sidebar it for a separate meeting later in the day. So specific to your question, I wouldn't tackle sprint replanning during the Daily Scrum, but clarification of the existing sprint plan would be reasonable.
3) N/A
4) The Scrum Guide is fairly clear on this: "The Development Team modifies the Sprint Backlog throughout the Sprint, and the Sprint Backlog emerges during the Sprint" and "When elements of the plan are deemed unnecessary, they are removed." The Sprint Backlog is flexible and dynamic, and so long as all parties involved recognize that some work-in-progress may be lost or costs may increase, then there's no reason not to adjust it as appropriate. Keeping a frozen backlog gives up some of the "agility" of agile.
The Sprint Goal, on the other hand, doesn't typically change after Sprint Planning. If the Sprint Goal becomes unobtainable, you do retain the option to scrap the entire sprint and start over. However, you aren't going to want to change the core purpose of your potentially releasable increment halfway through a release.
5) If the Sprint contains several feedback loops and opportunities for inspection and adoption, then doesn't the Sprint as a whole package offer these same features, through its events? I would say yes, a Sprint is a feedback loop, and those lessons can be applied to the next Sprint.
6) Anecdotally, I passed the PSPO I without those guides, so it's certainly not a requirement. While I can't speak for the depth of the PSPO II, the PSPO I is based on the framework, artifacts and events covered in the Scrum Guide.
However, Scrum is a lightweight framework with lots of room to add more events and artifacts. It's not a bad idea to look at supplementary artifacts and see how they fit into and support "scrum" events, roles and artifacts. Spend the time understanding why they exist and what they support, but don't burn yourself out trying to memorize the minor details of each artifact specific to that flavor of Scrum.
Jason, Thank you for your answers to my questions. I appreciate them very much. The sources that I have used have very different viewpoints for #4. There was a very clear distinction between Sprint Backlog Items (Product Backlog Items selected from the Product Backlog for the Sprint) and tasks (work/scope/the plan). There was almost no flexibility in Sprint Backlog Items but alot of flexibility in tasks in terms of changes during the Sprint.
Again, I appreciate your feedback/insights.
Hi! Can I ask about when the people other than the Scrum team are allowed to attend in a meeting?
In one practice exam source, it says that the key stakeholders are allowed ONLY in sprint review meeting. However, there is also this information that PO may invite the stakeholders in the sprint planning meeting for technical/domain advice. Doesn't this mean that stakeholders are also allowed to attend meeting other than sprint review? Or, is this because for Sprint Review, stakeholders are required to attend whereas during Sprint planning they are not required unless they are invited. May I know what is the latest understanding regarding this?
Hi Karl - Be careful of practice exams, many are either poorly written or not created by people who know a lot about Scrum. I only trust a few exams, one being the Scrum.org Open.
I would agree with you, stakeholders might be invited to Sprint Planning or a refinement session (technically not a Scrum event). Developers might also invite someone from outside of the Scrum Team to Sprint Planning. There is nothing wrong with these situations.
Thanks Chris!