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

Scaled Agile SAFe-SGP Exam - Topic 2 Question 8 Discussion

Actual exam question for Scaled Agile's SAFe-SGP exam
Question #: 8
Topic #: 2
[All SAFe-SGP Questions]

Which reduces the cone of uncertainty?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

According to theBuild Incrementally with Fast, Integrated Learning Cyclesarticle on the Scaled Agile Framework website, convergence of requirements with designs reduces the cone of uncertainty. The article states that ''The cone of uncertainty describes the uncertainty and risk in estimates at different phases of development. The cone narrows as the project progresses, reflecting the fact that there is less uncertainty and risk as more is learned about the requirements and design of the system. The goal is to reduce the cone of uncertainty as quickly as possible by converging on the requirements and design through fast feedback and learning cycles.'' Therefore, the correct answer is A, convergence of requirements with designs. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the terms that describe reducing the cone of uncertainty. Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications (B), convergence of architectures with design sets , and convergence of flexible specifications with design sets (D) are not concepts that are used in the Scaled Agile Framework.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Sonia
3 months ago
Not sure about D, feels a bit off to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Van
3 months ago
C seems like a solid option too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annabelle
3 months ago
Wait, is it really that simple?
upvoted 0 times
...
Minna
4 months ago
I think B makes more sense, though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jaleesa
4 months ago
A is definitely the right choice!
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryln
4 months ago
D sounds familiar, but I’m not confident. I think we talked about design sets in relation to uncertainty, but I can't remember how they fit together.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lucina
4 months ago
I’m leaning towards C, but I’m a bit confused. I remember a practice question that mentioned architectures, but I can’t recall the details.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lanie
5 months ago
I feel like B could be the right answer too. We discussed how flexible specs can help clarify options in class.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anastacia
5 months ago
I think it might be A, but I'm not entirely sure. I remember something about requirements being key to reducing uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
5 months ago
My strategy here is to carefully read through each answer choice and think about how it could impact the cone of uncertainty. I'm leaning towards D - convergence of flexible specifications with design sets, but I'm not 100% sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jimmie
5 months ago
I'm a little confused by the wording of the question and the answer choices. Can anyone clarify what exactly is meant by "cone of uncertainty" and how the different options relate to that? I want to make sure I understand this properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Markus
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm not totally sure about this one. The options all sound kind of similar to me. I'll have to think it through carefully before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lili
5 months ago
This one seems pretty straightforward. I think the answer is A - convergence of requirements with designs. That makes the most sense to me for reducing the cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rebeca
5 months ago
I'm pretty confident the answer is B - convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications. That seems like the best way to reduce the cone of uncertainty based on what I've learned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yasuko
5 months ago
Okay, I've got this. The question is asking about the most basic level of cost accumulation, which is by cost center. That's the answer that makes the most sense based on the information given.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlette
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the options here. They all seem to include some of the key elements of Cisco's Collaboration Portfolio, but I'm not sure which one is the most complete. I'll need to review my notes to make sure I understand this properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dona
5 months ago
Recall: for a dividend-paying MF, total return = (final NAV × units) + total dividends âˆ' initial investment, all over initial investment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delsie
5 months ago
This question seems straightforward, I'm pretty confident I can figure this out.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yasuko
2 years ago
Good points. I guess we'll see soon enough!
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristen
2 years ago
I picked D because I thought flexible specifications are key.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karan
2 years ago
I went with C. Convergence of architectures with design sets seemed logical to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fletcher
2 years ago
Really? I chose B, convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viola
2 years ago
Yeah, I wasn't sure either. I think it's A, convergence of requirements with designs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yasuko
2 years ago
That question on the cone of uncertainty was tricky.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel