Back to Forum

Question on availability and quality statements

Last post 10:15 am June 10, 2014 by Ludwig Harsch
3 replies
Michael Owen
01:43 pm June 5, 2014

Hi all SM and potential SM,

This is not a trick question, from the question I would simply like you to
provide the answer to
Part A: which is the "least" suitable and why.
Part B: which is the "most" suitable, and why.


Q: The least and most ineffective time for updating the quality statement and
declaring Sprint availability for the next Sprint is.

A: Daily standup (sticking to the 15 minute time box)

B: Sprint Retrospective

C: Sprint review

D: Sprint Planning

There is a logic in why I'm asking, its not because I don't know the answer.
I would just like to show that the rest of the community cant be wrong either, next week.
Entries close Monday midday, good luck with the question, its a tough one.

For inexperienced SM this is not a question in any exam you will get, have a go anyway.
For experienced SM this is an actual decision someone made, this may be a tough one.

Michael

Ian Mitchell
09:01 am June 6, 2014

I don't know the answer. The question contains two references that don't make sense to me:

1) "quality statement". This could refer to the Definition of Done, but if so, I don't understand why the correct term has been avoided.

2) "declaring Sprint availability for the next Sprint". I'm not sure what is meant by "Sprint availability". If this means whether or not the next Sprint will happen at all, then the sooner the team receive this information the better (they needn't spend time refining the Product Backlog if there are to be no more sprints). On the other hand, if it refers to a declaration of team availability (capacity) for the next Sprint, then in Scrum you wouldn't provide such a thing. It is of course reasonable to state an opinion of the *likely* capacity for future sprints if asked. However, a declaration of Sprint availability that is sufficient for Sprint Planning purposes can only be made for the current sprint, and even then it is still merely a projection. This can be evidenced by the Scrum Guide which states, under "[Sprint Planning] Topic One: What can be done this Sprint?", that one of the inputs is "the projected capacity of the Development Team during the Sprint".

Michael Owen
04:19 pm June 6, 2014


Ian,

Let me rephrase it to scrum, not the version of scrum this comes from.
*potential capabilities
*demonstrates the work that it has “Done”

Michael

Ludwig Harsch
10:15 am June 10, 2014

Michael,
I am totally confused.
potential capabilities: Do you mean projected capacity? -> Sprint Planning (least ineffective) and Daily Standup (most ineffective)
demonstrates the work that it has "Done" -> Sprint Review (least ineffective) and Sprint Planning (most ineffective)
But what does this have to do with updating the quality statement and declaring Sprint availability?

By posting on our forums you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.

Please note that the first and last name from your Scrum.org member profile will be displayed next to any topic or comment you post on the forums. For privacy concerns, we cannot allow you to post email addresses. All user-submitted content on our Forums may be subject to deletion if it is found to be in violation of our Terms of Use. Scrum.org does not endorse user-submitted content or the content of links to any third-party websites.

Terms of Use

Scrum.org may, at its discretion, remove any post that it deems unsuitable for these forums. Unsuitable post content includes, but is not limited to, Scrum.org Professional-level assessment questions and answers, profanity, insults, racism or sexually explicit content. Using our forum as a platform for the marketing and solicitation of products or services is also prohibited. Forum members who post content deemed unsuitable by Scrum.org may have their access revoked at any time, without warning. Scrum.org may, but is not obliged to, monitor submissions.