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

Scaled Agile SAFe-APM Exam - Topic 8 Question 10 Discussion

When calculating Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF), what action should be taken?
C) Put each team in its own WSJF bucket
A) Execute one column at a time in full, then move on to the next
B) Set your 'ceiling' in Fibonacci and work down to the lowest-scoring item
D) Perform individual sizing by role in isolation, then synchronize the scoring later

Scaled Agile SAFe-APM Exam - Topic 8 Question 10 Discussion

Actual exam question for Scaled Agile's SAFe-APM exam
Question #: 10
Topic #: 8
[All SAFe-APM Questions]

When calculating Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF), what action should be taken?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

The most important planning question for primary research is what will be asked, because this determines the type, quality, and relevance of the data that will be collected. The research question or hypothesis should be specific, narrow, and discoverable through primary research methods, and it should align with the research purpose and objectives. The research question or hypothesis guides the choice of the research medium, the sample size and selection, and the data analysis and interpretation.


What is Primary Research?: This article from Purdue OWL defines primary research and explains the steps and considerations involved in planning and conducting primary research.

10.3: Planning Your Primary Research Project: This article from Humanities LibreTexts provides some tips and examples on how to plan a primary research project, including defining the research question or hypothesis, choosing the research method, and designing the research instrument.

by Nana at May 20, 2024, 05:00 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium SAFe-APM Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Augustine
9 months ago
Each team in its own bucket? That could get messy!
upvoted 0 times
...
Margarett
9 months ago
I disagree, executing one column at a time is too slow.
upvoted 0 times
...
Telma
10 months ago
Wait, are we really using Fibonacci for ceilings? Seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laila
10 months ago
I think option D makes the most sense for accurate scoring.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alpha
10 months ago
WSJF is all about prioritizing based on value and effort!
upvoted 0 times
...
Barrie
10 months ago
I vaguely remember something about individual sizing by role, but synchronizing later seems tricky. I hope I don't mix that up during the exam!
upvoted 0 times
...
Edwin
10 months ago
I feel like putting each team in its own WSJF bucket could complicate things, but I can't remember why we thought that was a bad idea.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nicolette
11 months ago
I remember practicing a question where we had to set a ceiling for scoring, but I can't recall if it was specifically about Fibonacci. That might be relevant here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cathrine
11 months ago
I think we discussed something about executing one column at a time in our last study group, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the right approach for WSJF.
upvoted 0 times
...
Novella
11 months ago
Putting each team in its own WSJF bucket? I'm not sure that makes sense for this question. Gotta think this through.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delmy
11 months ago
Setting a Fibonacci "ceiling" and working down sounds like an interesting strategy, but I'm not sure if that's the right approach here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jodi
11 months ago
Okay, I remember learning about WSJF in class. I think the key is to focus on the relative priorities, not just the individual scores.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearlie
11 months ago
I'm not totally sure about the WSJF process, but I think executing one column at a time might be the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barbra
11 months ago
Hmm, this WSJF question seems tricky. I'll need to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alfred
11 months ago
Okay, let's see. Caller Tracking, Caller Restriction, and Caller Permission all sound like they could be caller access field options. I'm going to have to eliminate those and go with C. None.
upvoted 0 times
...
Natalie
11 months ago
I remember a practice question where we discussed how an audit trail helps in verifying transaction completeness. I'm not entirely sure, but it seems like A might be part of that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carma
11 months ago
Okay, I've got this. The key is to identify the most serious risk that could result from a compromised customer management interface over the public internet.
upvoted 0 times
...
Claribel
11 months ago
I'm a little confused on the differences between SNMP, SMTP, SCP, and SFTP. I'll need to review those protocols before deciding.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brice
1 year ago
Wait, did someone say 'Fibonacci'? I thought this was a simple job prioritization technique, not a secret code from Da Vinci!
upvoted 0 times
Armando
1 year ago
C) Put each team in its own WSJF bucket
upvoted 0 times
...
Tyisha
1 year ago
Wait, did someone say 'Fibonacci'? I thought this was a simple job prioritization technique, not a secret code from Da Vinci!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kanisha
1 year ago
B) Set your 'ceiling' in Fibonacci and work down to the lowest-scoring item
upvoted 0 times
...
Hobert
1 year ago
A) Execute one column at a time in full, then move on to the next
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Brande
1 year ago
Hah, I can just imagine some poor soul trying to wrangle all the team WSJF buckets. Nah, I'm sticking with the classic individual sizing approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tomas
1 year ago
Putting each team in its own bucket? That just sounds like a recipe for confusion. I'll have to go with D - it makes the most sense to size things individually first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gail
1 year ago
I prefer setting my 'ceiling' in Fibonacci and working down to the lowest-scoring item.
upvoted 0 times
...
Omer
1 year ago
B sounds like a weird way to do it. Fibonacci ceilings? Come on, this is WSJF, not some advanced math problem!
upvoted 0 times
Denae
1 year ago
C) Put each team in its own WSJF bucket
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorathy
1 year ago
A) Execute one column at a time in full, then move on to the next
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rocco
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe we should execute one column at a time in full, then move on to the next.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rossana
1 year ago
I think option A is the way to go - it's the most straightforward approach to WSJF. You tackle one column at a time instead of jumping around.
upvoted 0 times
Blythe
1 year ago
User 4: I think performing individual sizing by role first is more efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tori
1 year ago
User 3: Putting each team in its own WSJF bucket seems like a good idea.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isaac
1 year ago
User 2: I prefer setting my 'ceiling' in Fibonacci and working down.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vicki
1 year ago
User 1: I agree, tackling one column at a time makes it easier to focus.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Larae
1 year ago
I think we should put each team in its own WSJF bucket.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel