최신Scrum Professional Scrum Master level III (PSM III) - PSM-III무료샘플문제
문제1
The process of regular inspection and adaptation employs knowledgeable and skilled inspectors. What are two ways in which the Product Owner takes the lead in the inspection process?
The process of regular inspection and adaptation employs knowledgeable and skilled inspectors. What are two ways in which the Product Owner takes the lead in the inspection process?
정답:
TheProduct Ownertakes the lead in inspection by focusing onproduct value and direction, ensuring that learning from evidence directly informs future decisions.
1. Inspecting and Ordering the Product Backlog Based on Evidence
The Product Owner continuouslyinspects the Product Backlogusing information gained from:
* Delivered Increments,
* Stakeholder feedback,
* Market changes and risks.
By ordering and refining the Product Backlog, the Product Owner leads inspection of whether the backlog still reflects themost valuable and relevant work, ensuring that adaptation is based on evidence rather than assumptions.
2. Leading Product Inspection During the Sprint Review
The Product Owner leads inspection during theSprint Reviewby framing the conversation around:
* The Product Goal,
* What value the Increment delivers,
* What has been learned.
By engaging stakeholders in inspecting the Increment and guiding discussions about what to do next, the Product Owner ensures that feedback is transformed intoProduct Backlog adaptation.
1. Inspecting and Ordering the Product Backlog Based on Evidence
The Product Owner continuouslyinspects the Product Backlogusing information gained from:
* Delivered Increments,
* Stakeholder feedback,
* Market changes and risks.
By ordering and refining the Product Backlog, the Product Owner leads inspection of whether the backlog still reflects themost valuable and relevant work, ensuring that adaptation is based on evidence rather than assumptions.
2. Leading Product Inspection During the Sprint Review
The Product Owner leads inspection during theSprint Reviewby framing the conversation around:
* The Product Goal,
* What value the Increment delivers,
* What has been learned.
By engaging stakeholders in inspecting the Increment and guiding discussions about what to do next, the Product Owner ensures that feedback is transformed intoProduct Backlog adaptation.
문제2
How the organization discusses and plans the work of creating software will be reflected in the implementation of that software.
Technical systems can be decomposed to composite elements, from the large to the small. Basic components may be represented as activities, workflows, functions, features, capabilities, and other similar nomenclature.
How does this system decomposition affect Scrum Teams on scaled projects?
How the organization discusses and plans the work of creating software will be reflected in the implementation of that software.
Technical systems can be decomposed to composite elements, from the large to the small. Basic components may be represented as activities, workflows, functions, features, capabilities, and other similar nomenclature.
How does this system decomposition affect Scrum Teams on scaled projects?
정답:
How an organization discusses, plans, and decomposes work is inevitably reflected in the software it produces. When technical systems are decomposed into elements such as activities, workflows, functions, features, or components, these decomposition choices have adirect and systemic impact on Scrum Teams, especially inscaled Scrum environments.
1. Decomposition Influences Team Structure (Conway's Law)
In scaled projects, system decomposition often drives how teams are formed. When work is decomposed along technical components or functions, organizations tend to createspecialist or component teams(e.g., front- end teams, back-end teams). This results in:
* Increaseddependencies between teams,
* More handoffs and coordination,
* Reduced autonomy of individual teams.
Scrum, however, expects teams to becross-functionaland capable of delivering usable Increments independently. Component-based decomposition therefore hinders effective Scrum adoption at scale.
2. Effect on Value Delivery and Transparency
Scrum relies on frequent inspection ofintegrated, working product Increments. When decomposition focuses on small technical parts rather thanend-to-end features or capabilities, teams may deliver partial outputs instead of usable value.
This negatively affects:
* Transparency, as progress is reported through intermediate artifacts rather than working software,
* Inspection, since stakeholders cannot meaningfully evaluate value,
* Adaptation, because feedback is delayed until integration occurs.
In scaled Scrum, this often results in "almost done" work that is not truly Done.
3. Feature-Oriented Decomposition Supports Scrum
Scrum scales more effectively when system decomposition emphasizesvertical slices of value, such as features or capabilities, rather than horizontal technical layers. Feature-oriented decomposition enables:
* Cross-functional teams,
* Reduced dependencies,
* Faster feedback cycles,
* Independent delivery of value by each team.
This approach aligns with Scrum's expectation that every Sprint produces ausable Increment.
4. Impact on Integration and Risk
Decomposition decisions strongly affectintegration frequency. Poor decomposition increases integration complexity and encourages late integration, which raises risk and reduces learning.
In Scrum-especially at scale-integration must happen early and often. Unintegrated work is not considered Done, and delayed integration undermines empiricism by hiding real system behavior until late in development.
5. Learning and System Optimization
When Scrum Teams work on complete features rather than isolated components, they gain broader insight into:
* Customer needs,
* System-wide trade-offs,
* End-to-end product behavior.
This shared understanding improves decision-making and supportscontinuous improvement at the system level, rather than local optimization within silos.
1. Decomposition Influences Team Structure (Conway's Law)
In scaled projects, system decomposition often drives how teams are formed. When work is decomposed along technical components or functions, organizations tend to createspecialist or component teams(e.g., front- end teams, back-end teams). This results in:
* Increaseddependencies between teams,
* More handoffs and coordination,
* Reduced autonomy of individual teams.
Scrum, however, expects teams to becross-functionaland capable of delivering usable Increments independently. Component-based decomposition therefore hinders effective Scrum adoption at scale.
2. Effect on Value Delivery and Transparency
Scrum relies on frequent inspection ofintegrated, working product Increments. When decomposition focuses on small technical parts rather thanend-to-end features or capabilities, teams may deliver partial outputs instead of usable value.
This negatively affects:
* Transparency, as progress is reported through intermediate artifacts rather than working software,
* Inspection, since stakeholders cannot meaningfully evaluate value,
* Adaptation, because feedback is delayed until integration occurs.
In scaled Scrum, this often results in "almost done" work that is not truly Done.
3. Feature-Oriented Decomposition Supports Scrum
Scrum scales more effectively when system decomposition emphasizesvertical slices of value, such as features or capabilities, rather than horizontal technical layers. Feature-oriented decomposition enables:
* Cross-functional teams,
* Reduced dependencies,
* Faster feedback cycles,
* Independent delivery of value by each team.
This approach aligns with Scrum's expectation that every Sprint produces ausable Increment.
4. Impact on Integration and Risk
Decomposition decisions strongly affectintegration frequency. Poor decomposition increases integration complexity and encourages late integration, which raises risk and reduces learning.
In Scrum-especially at scale-integration must happen early and often. Unintegrated work is not considered Done, and delayed integration undermines empiricism by hiding real system behavior until late in development.
5. Learning and System Optimization
When Scrum Teams work on complete features rather than isolated components, they gain broader insight into:
* Customer needs,
* System-wide trade-offs,
* End-to-end product behavior.
This shared understanding improves decision-making and supportscontinuous improvement at the system level, rather than local optimization within silos.
문제3
"Technical debt is the sole concern of the development team". As a Scrum Master, do you agree with this statement? Whyor why not?.
"Technical debt is the sole concern of the development team". As a Scrum Master, do you agree with this statement? Whyor why not?.
정답:
As a Scrum Master, I donot agreewith the statement that technical debt is the sole concern of the Development Team. While Developers are responsible for recognizing and understanding technical debt, its impact extends far beyond the team and affectsagility, quality, and deliveryat the product and organizational level.
First, technical debt directly influences a team'sability to remain agile. As technical debt accumulates, the cost and effort required to change the product increase. This slows down development, reduces predictability, and eventually makes it difficult-or even impossible-to deliver working software within reasonable timeframes. When agility is reduced, the entireorganizationsuffers, not just the Development Team.
Second, technical debt has a significant impact onproduct quality and delivery. High levels of technical debt often lead to defects, instability, and integration problems. This undermines the Scrum principle of delivering a "Done" Increment each Sprint. When the product cannot be reliably delivered or inspected, customers and stakeholders are directly affected, making technical debt a shared concern.
Third, while Developers are best positioned toidentify when technical debt occurs, addressing it requires collaboration across the Scrum Team. The Product Owner must understand that not all work in a Sprint will result in new functionality. Investing in reducing technical debt is an investment in future value, sustainability, and delivery capability. Stakeholders also need transparency about this trade-off.
Fourth, Scrum encourages making technical debt visible andaddressing it continuously, rather than postponing it indefinitely. This may involve adding technical debt-related work to the Product Backlog and prioritizing it alongside functional work. Treating technical debt as "invisible" or purely technical undermines empiricism and long-term value creation.
First, technical debt directly influences a team'sability to remain agile. As technical debt accumulates, the cost and effort required to change the product increase. This slows down development, reduces predictability, and eventually makes it difficult-or even impossible-to deliver working software within reasonable timeframes. When agility is reduced, the entireorganizationsuffers, not just the Development Team.
Second, technical debt has a significant impact onproduct quality and delivery. High levels of technical debt often lead to defects, instability, and integration problems. This undermines the Scrum principle of delivering a "Done" Increment each Sprint. When the product cannot be reliably delivered or inspected, customers and stakeholders are directly affected, making technical debt a shared concern.
Third, while Developers are best positioned toidentify when technical debt occurs, addressing it requires collaboration across the Scrum Team. The Product Owner must understand that not all work in a Sprint will result in new functionality. Investing in reducing technical debt is an investment in future value, sustainability, and delivery capability. Stakeholders also need transparency about this trade-off.
Fourth, Scrum encourages making technical debt visible andaddressing it continuously, rather than postponing it indefinitely. This may involve adding technical debt-related work to the Product Backlog and prioritizing it alongside functional work. Treating technical debt as "invisible" or purely technical undermines empiricism and long-term value creation.
문제4
What risk is introduced if not all Development Team members are present for the Daily Scrum?
What risk is introduced if not all Development Team members are present for the Daily Scrum?
정답:
If not all Development Team members are present at theDaily Scrum, several risks are introduced that undermineempiricism, collaboration, and the team's ability to achieve theSprint Goal.
First,transparency is reduced. The Daily Scrum exists to create a shared understanding of progress, plans, and impediments. When some Developers are absent, their work, discoveries, risks, or impediments are not fully visible to the rest of the team. This results in an incomplete or inaccurate picture of the Sprint Backlog's current state.
Second,inspection becomes ineffective. The Daily Scrum is the primary event where Developers inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal. Missing perspectives means that inspection is based on partial information, increasing the likelihood that important issues-such as integration problems, dependencies, or quality concerns-go unnoticed until later in the Sprint.
Third,adaptation is delayed or suboptimal. Without full participation, the team may make planning adjustments that do not account for all constraints or opportunities. This can lead to rework, misalignment, or duplicated effort, and increases the risk of failing to meet the Sprint Goal.
Fourth, the absence of team members weakenscollective ownership and accountability. The Daily Scrum reinforces that the Developers are jointly responsible for the Sprint Goal. Regular absence can create silos, reduce collaboration, and signal that shared planning and alignment are optional.
Finally, over time, inconsistent attendance can turn the Daily Scrum into astatus meeting for those present, rather than a collaborative planning event for the whole team. This undermines Scrum Values, particularly Commitment, Respect, and Openness.
First,transparency is reduced. The Daily Scrum exists to create a shared understanding of progress, plans, and impediments. When some Developers are absent, their work, discoveries, risks, or impediments are not fully visible to the rest of the team. This results in an incomplete or inaccurate picture of the Sprint Backlog's current state.
Second,inspection becomes ineffective. The Daily Scrum is the primary event where Developers inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal. Missing perspectives means that inspection is based on partial information, increasing the likelihood that important issues-such as integration problems, dependencies, or quality concerns-go unnoticed until later in the Sprint.
Third,adaptation is delayed or suboptimal. Without full participation, the team may make planning adjustments that do not account for all constraints or opportunities. This can lead to rework, misalignment, or duplicated effort, and increases the risk of failing to meet the Sprint Goal.
Fourth, the absence of team members weakenscollective ownership and accountability. The Daily Scrum reinforces that the Developers are jointly responsible for the Sprint Goal. Regular absence can create silos, reduce collaboration, and signal that shared planning and alignment are optional.
Finally, over time, inconsistent attendance can turn the Daily Scrum into astatus meeting for those present, rather than a collaborative planning event for the whole team. This undermines Scrum Values, particularly Commitment, Respect, and Openness.