Scrum PSM-II Exam - Topic 3 Question 85 Discussion

Actual exam question for Scrum's PSM-II exam

Question #: 85
Topic #: 3

After some small experiments with Scrum, your company decides to do a complete project with Scrum. As Scrum Master; you have been invited to the "project kick-off meeting" with IT and product management

The Product Owner asks how many Sprints IT will need to first figure out architecture and infrastructure issues. What are two options to explain how such work is managed using Scrum?

(choose the best two answers)

AYou explain that product management should not worry about such typical IT work. You inform them that you will assure that the team members reach out to the right people within the IT organization when needed During each Sprint Planning event they will keep the Product Owner updated about the additional effort it will take for that Sprint. That effort will come on top of the effort for the forecasted functional development.

BYou explain that technical risks are best controlled when architecture and infrastructure emerge alongside the development of functionality. The additional advantage is that business value is created faster and sooner.

CYou thank product management for understanding that these efforts indeed require effort and budget You confirm that architecture and infrastructure are best addressed before starting Scrum, but that the exact budget is difficult to calculate upfront You say you will organize this work in timeboxed Sprints of no more than 30 days to limit risk and be transparent toward product management on the actual progress.

DYou educate the Product Owner to add this work to the Product Backlog to uphold transparency. Ask the Developers to plan work during the first several Sprints to estimate these items, while also creating some business functionality in these early Sprints

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B, D

B) You explain that technical risks are best controlled when architecture and infrastructure emerge alongside the development of functionality. The additional advantage is that business value is created faster and sooner.

This is a good option because it is consistent with the Scrum principle of empiricism, which means that the Scrum Team learns and adapts based on the actual outcomes and feedback, rather than following a predefined plan12.By allowing the architecture and infrastructure to emerge iteratively and incrementally, the Scrum Team can address the most important and uncertain aspects first, and deliver valuable and functional increments every Sprint34. D. You educate the Product Owner to add this work to the Product Backlog to uphold transparency. Ask the Developers to plan work during the first several Sprints to estimate these items, while also creating some business functionality in these early Sprints

This is another good option because it is consistent with the Scrum value of transparency, which means that the Scrum Team and the stakeholders have a clear and common understanding of the product vision, goals, progress, and risks12. By adding this work to the Product Backlog, the Product Owner can prioritize and refine it according to the value and urgency, and communicate it to the stakeholders.By asking the Developers to plan work during the first several Sprints, they can estimate these items based on their actual experience and capacity, while also delivering some business functionality in these early Sprints34.

by Elenor at Jul 14, 2025, 02:33 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Raylene

2 months ago

Totally agree with B! Faster delivery is always a win.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sarina

2 months ago

D is the way to go! Transparency is crucial in Scrum.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sol

3 months ago

I disagree with C. We can't just ignore the upfront planning.

upvoted 0 times

...

Timmy

3 months ago

Surprised to see A as an option. That approach seems risky!

upvoted 0 times

...

Kaycee

3 months ago

Option B makes a lot of sense! Integrating architecture with development is key.

upvoted 0 times

...

Irma

3 months ago

I recall that we talked about timeboxing in our last session. Option C mentions that, but it feels like it might be too rigid for Scrum. I’m torn on which options are best.

upvoted 0 times

...

Karina

4 months ago

I feel like option A might downplay the importance of architecture work. I’m not confident that just reaching out to IT is enough to address those concerns.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dulce

4 months ago

I think option D makes sense because it emphasizes transparency and involves the Product Owner directly. It’s similar to a practice question we did about backlog management.

upvoted 0 times

...

Melina

4 months ago

I remember discussing how architecture can evolve with the product. Option B seems to align with that idea, but I'm not entirely sure if it's the best approach for this scenario.

upvoted 0 times

...

Asuncion

4 months ago

For this type of situation, I think Option D is the way to go. Adding the technical work to the Product Backlog and estimating it alongside the business functionality will help maintain transparency and ensure we're not neglecting either area. It's important to keep the big picture in mind.

upvoted 0 times

...

Billy

4 months ago

I like the idea of Option C - organizing the technical work into short Sprints to limit risk and keep the Product Owner informed. That seems like a good compromise between getting the infrastructure in place and still delivering some business value early on.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rolland

5 months ago

I'm a bit confused on the best way to handle this. Should we just focus on the technical work first and then move to the business functionality? Or is it better to try to do both in parallel? I'm not sure which option would be the most transparent.

upvoted 0 times

...

Angelyn

5 months ago

This is a tricky one, but I think the key is to find a balance between addressing the technical needs and still delivering business value. Options A and B seem like good approaches to consider.

upvoted 0 times

...

Wenona

6 months ago

Option A seems a bit risky. Hiding the IT work from the Product Owner could create some trust issues down the line. Transparency is key in Scrum.

upvoted 0 times

Kandis

5 months ago

upvoted 0 times

...

Irma

6 months ago

Haha, I'm just picturing the Scrum Master trying to explain technical jargon to the Product Owner. C seems like the most diplomatic way to handle that situation.

upvoted 0 times

Kizzy

5 months ago

A) You explain that product management should not worry about such typical IT work. You inform them that you will assure that the team members reach out to the right people within the IT organization when needed During each Sprint Planning event they will keep the Product Owner updated about the additional effort it will take for that Sprint. That effort will come on top of the effort for the forecasted functional development.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kristel

7 months ago

D sounds like a good approach. Keeping the architecture and infrastructure work transparent on the Product Backlog is important for the whole team to understand the big picture.

upvoted 0 times

Stephen

5 months ago

upvoted 0 times

...

Glenn

5 months ago

upvoted 0 times

...

Linwood

7 months ago

That's a valid point. Option C does prioritize transparency and risk management. It's important to keep product management informed about the progress of such work.

upvoted 0 times

...

Glenn

7 months ago

I disagree, I believe option C is more suitable. It acknowledges the importance of addressing architecture and infrastructure before starting Scrum, while also being transparent about the progress to product management.

upvoted 0 times

...

Keith

7 months ago

I think B is the best answer. Scrum is all about iterative development, so it makes sense to tackle the technical aspects alongside the functional work.

upvoted 0 times

Carli

7 months ago

upvoted 0 times

...

Tandra

7 months ago

upvoted 0 times

...

Linwood

7 months ago

I think option A is the best approach. It ensures that the team can focus on functional development while also addressing architecture and infrastructure issues when needed.

upvoted 0 times

...