New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

iSQI CTFL_Syll_4.0 Exam - Topic 3 Question 40 Discussion

Actual exam question for iSQI's CTFL_Syll_4.0 exam
Question #: 40
Topic #: 3
[All CTFL_Syll_4.0 Questions]

Consider an estimation session in which a six-member Agile team (Membl,..., Memb6) uses the planning poker technique to estimate a user story (in story points). The team members will use a set of cards with the following values: 1. 2, 3, 5, 8,13, 21. Below is the outcome of the first round of estimation for this session:

Membl = 3 Memb2 = 3 Memb3 = 3

Memb4 = 21 Memb5 = 3 Memb6 = 1

Which of the following answers best describes how the estimation session should proceed?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Planning poker is a consensus-based estimation technique used in Agile. It involves team members selecting cards with their estimate for a user story, then discussing the differences in estimates.

Option A: Incorrect. While three-point estimation is valid, planning poker focuses on team consensus rather than individual estimation techniques.

Option B: Incorrect. The goal of planning poker is not to force unanimity but to reach a reasonable consensus.

Option C: Incorrect. Averaging estimates is not how planning poker works.

Option D: Correct. The members with the highest and lowest estimates discuss their reasoning to foster understanding and adjust estimates accordingly in subsequent rounds.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Carin
2 months ago
Just a reminder, the cards are 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gerri
3 months ago
I think we should go with option B for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Azzie
3 months ago
Seems like a huge gap in estimates!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ricarda
3 months ago
Wait, how can Memb4 think it's 21? That’s wild!
upvoted 0 times
...
James
3 months ago
Totally agree with D, we need to discuss those extremes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Larae
3 months ago
I think it's crucial to hear from Memb4 and Memb6 about their estimates. It could help clarify the situation before we estimate again, which aligns with option D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Heike
4 months ago
I feel like using the three-point estimation technique is something we covered, but I can't recall if we should apply it here. Option A seems a bit off to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Geraldine
4 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think we might have practiced something similar where we just kept estimating until everyone agreed. That sounds like option B, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Geoffrey
4 months ago
I remember we discussed that when there's a wide range of estimates, it's important to have a conversation to understand the reasoning behind them. So, I think option D makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bette
4 months ago
Hmm, I'm leaning towards trying another round of estimation. Getting everyone on the same page seems important here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lera
5 months ago
I'm pretty confident my estimate of 21 is accurate, but I'm open to hearing the others' perspectives. We need to work through this as a team.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilda
5 months ago
I think the key is to get everyone to explain their reasoning, like the question suggests. That should help us converge on a shared understanding.
upvoted 0 times
...
Selene
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the different estimates. I'm not sure if we should go with the average or try another round of estimation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ling
5 months ago
This one's tricky, but I think we need to keep discussing until we reach a consensus. The wide range of estimates suggests we're not all on the same page yet.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel