Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

PMI-ACP Exam - Topic 2 Question 98 Discussion

Exhibit:Based on the backlog metrics in the chart, what can explain the Jump in points at the end of iteration 4?
D) The team learned that the product owner needed to increase the output in the next release
A) The team neglected to account for support and maintenance costs associated with other supported products
B) The team discovered that previously accepted work could be greatly improved and added story points associated with that work
C) The team realized that some stories were underestimated relative to other stones and reestimated as needed

PMI-ACP Exam - Topic 2 Question 98 Discussion

Actual exam question for PMI's PMI-ACP exam
Question #: 98
Topic #: 2
[All PMI-ACP Questions]

Exhibit:

Based on the backlog metrics in the chart, what can explain the Jump in points at the end of iteration 4?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

by Thea at Mar 08, 2025, 01:59 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PMI-ACP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Merissa
5 months ago
I heard they added story points for improvements, which is interesting!
upvoted 0 times
...
William
6 months ago
Wait, are we sure they just didn't miscalculate earlier?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronna
6 months ago
Totally agree, that jump is too big to ignore!
upvoted 0 times
...
Harrison
6 months ago
I think the product owner pushing for more output makes sense here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leota
6 months ago
Looks like they reestimated some stories.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tonette
7 months ago
I wonder if the increase in output relates to the product owner's influence, like option D suggests. It seems plausible but I'm not entirely convinced.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacquelyne
7 months ago
I feel like option C makes sense because underestimating stories is a common issue, but I can't recall if it specifically applies to this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cordelia
7 months ago
I think we practiced a question similar to this where the team added points after realizing some work could be improved. That might be option B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Gearldine
7 months ago
I remember discussing how re-estimating stories can lead to jumps in points, but I'm not sure if that's the main reason here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ulysses
7 months ago
I think option C makes the most sense to me. The team realizing some stories were underestimated and re-estimating them would explain that sudden increase in points. But I'll review the other choices just to be thorough.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuki
8 months ago
I'm a bit confused by this one. The backlog metrics don't seem to give a clear indication of what happened. I'll need to re-read the question and options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yvonne
8 months ago
Okay, let's see. The jump in points at the end of iteration 4 is the key here. I'm leaning towards option C, but I'll double-check the other choices just to be sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Katheryn
8 months ago
Hmm, the options all seem plausible. I'll need to really think through the implications of each one to determine the most likely explanation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carma
8 months ago
This looks like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully analyze the backlog metrics and the options to figure out what could explain that jump in points.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
1 year ago
Haha, I bet the team was like, 'Oops, looks like we messed up the estimations! Time to play 'Let's Make a Deal' with the backlog!'
upvoted 0 times
Jesusita
1 year ago
D) The team learned that the product owner needed to increase the output in the next release
upvoted 0 times
...
Justine
1 year ago
C) The team realized that some stories were underestimated relative to other stones and reestimated as needed
upvoted 0 times
...
Sylvia
1 year ago
B) The team discovered that previously accepted work could be greatly improved and added story points associated with that work
upvoted 0 times
...
Pansy
1 year ago
A) The team neglected to account for support and maintenance costs associated with other supported products
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Leota
1 year ago
I agree, Option C makes the most sense. It's common for teams to discover underestimated stories and need to adjust the points accordingly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devora
1 year ago
Option C looks like the correct answer here. The team probably realized that some stories were underestimated and needed to re-estimate them.
upvoted 0 times
Leandro
1 year ago
It's important for teams to adjust estimates as they learn more about the work involved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Verlene
1 year ago
I think the team must have re-estimated the stories to reflect their actual complexity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buddy
1 year ago
Agreed, option C seems to be the most logical explanation for the jump in points.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ronnie
1 year ago
That's a good point, Alberta. Improvements in work could definitely lead to added story points.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alberta
1 year ago
I believe the team might have discovered improvements in previously accepted work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ellen
1 year ago
I agree with Ronnie, underestimation of stories could explain the increase in points.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronnie
1 year ago
I think the jump in points could be due to underestimation of some stories.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel