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
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Scaled Agile SSM Exam - Topic 5 Question 17 Discussion

Actual exam question for Scaled Agile's SSM exam
Question #: 17
Topic #: 5
[All SSM Questions]

What is one anti-pattern of the Inspect and Adapt?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

One benefit of holding regular system demos is that execution can be measured across the whole ART. A system demo is a significant event that provides an integrated view of new Features for the most recent Iteration delivered by all the teams in the Agile Release Train (ART). Each demo gives ART stakeholders an objective measure of progress during a Program Increment (PI). The system demo offers the ART a fact-based measure of current, system-level progress within the PI. It's the true measure of ART velocity and progress. Achieving this requires implementing the scalable engineering practices necessary to support Continuous Integration across the ART. By holding regular system demos, the ART can evaluate the quality, functionality, and usability of the solution, as well as identify and resolve any issues, risks, or dependencies. The system demo also provides an opportunity for feedback and learning from the customers, Business Owners, and other stakeholders, which can help the ART to align with the vision and goals, and to adapt to changing needs and expectations. (Must be taken from SAFe 6 Scrum Master resources)


System Demo - Scaled Agile Framework

SAFe Scrum Master Course Outline

by Rolande at May 31, 2024, 01:53 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Rosio
3 months ago
Yeah, I've seen teams struggle with too many ideas in workshops.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mila
3 months ago
I think too many ideas can actually dilute focus, not just one problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Linette
3 months ago
Wait, is it really that bad? I thought we were making progress!
upvoted 0 times
...
Larue
4 months ago
Totally agree, it’s frustrating when teams just talk without real outcomes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carry
4 months ago
A common issue is when no actionable improvements come out of the sessions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elli
4 months ago
I recall a practice question where only one problem was identified in retrospectives, and that seemed like a red flag for me. It feels limiting.
upvoted 0 times
...
France
4 months ago
I feel like the issue with team members not attending the demo could be significant too. It might lead to a lack of feedback.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jess
5 months ago
I'm not really sure, but I remember something about too many ideas being a problem in workshops. That could be an anti-pattern, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Marti
5 months ago
I think the anti-pattern might be related to not having actionable improvements. It seems like if we don't create features, we're just stuck.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karina
5 months ago
I think the answer is C - Too many ideas enter the problem-solving workshop. That seems like it could be an anti-pattern, as it might make it difficult to focus and prioritize the most important improvements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Samira
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused on this one. The options all seem plausible, but I'm not sure which one is the best answer. I'll have to review my notes and try to remember the key principles of Inspect and Adapt.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casey
5 months ago
Okay, let me see. I know the Inspect and Adapt process is about identifying areas for improvement and then taking action. So I'm guessing the anti-pattern would be not actually creating any actionable improvements, like option A suggests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauryn
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm not entirely sure about this one. I'll need to think it through carefully. Maybe B or C could also be correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
Irma
5 months ago
This question seems straightforward. I think the answer is A - No actionable improvement Features are created.
upvoted 0 times
...
Letha
5 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. Based on the options, it seems like "Service Protection" could be related to the protection of a specific process or the ability of the Traps agent to protect itself. I'll try to remember what I know about the Traps product and make an educated guess.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ciara
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of the question. Does it mean which specific repositories are installed, or just the general categories of repositories? I'll need to re-read it carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Omega
5 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. Audits are more formal and focused on finding defects, while management reviews are less formal and have broader goals. I think the key is to identify which statements accurately capture those differences.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeniffer
5 months ago
I feel pretty good about this one. The key is identifying two different authentication factors, like something you know (password, PIN) and something you have (smart card, debit card) or something you are (fingerprint). I'll go with those types of combinations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marguerita
5 months ago
This is a good test of our understanding of CUI prevention. I think a combination of proper inspection, insulation, coatings, and NDE is likely the best approach. But I'll need to analyze each option closely to determine the single best answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desire
9 months ago
Are we sure the correct answer isn't B? Not enough team members attending the PI System demo could definitely hinder the Inspect and Adapt process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Peter
9 months ago
I was leaning towards option A, but I can see how that could also be a valid answer. No actionable improvement features is definitely an anti-pattern.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kaycee
10 months ago
Option D seems like a good choice to me. If only one problem is identified, it might not give a comprehensive view of the issues the team is facing.
upvoted 0 times
Lavelle
9 months ago
Definitely, focusing on just one problem may not lead to significant improvements in the long run.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mirta
9 months ago
I think that's a valid point. It's crucial to address all the issues to improve as a team.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
9 months ago
I agree, it's important to identify multiple problems for a more thorough retrospective.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorinda
9 months ago
Option D seems like a good choice to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Maricela
10 months ago
I think option C is the correct answer. Too many ideas can overwhelm the problem-solving workshop and make it less effective.
upvoted 0 times
Brent
9 months ago
It's important to streamline the number of ideas in the problem-solving workshop to ensure that the team can effectively address the identified problems.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hayley
9 months ago
I think option C is a common anti-pattern because it can lead to a lack of focus and difficulty in prioritizing solutions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Miss
9 months ago
I agree, having too many ideas can definitely make the problem-solving workshop less effective.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Mi
11 months ago
I believe another anti-pattern could be C) Too many ideas enter the problem-solving workshop. It can lead to confusion and lack of focus on the most important issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tasia
11 months ago
I agree with Onita. If only one problem is identified, then the team may not be addressing all the issues affecting their performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Onita
11 months ago
I think one anti-pattern is D) Only one problem is identified by each team in the retrospective.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel