At the retrospective, the burndown chart shows that the project is slightly behind schedule. The project team identifies an inexperienced software engineer as the source of reduced velocity. How should the project team address this issue?
A.
Suggest pair programming during the retrospective
B.
Ask the product owner to re-prioritize the user stories at the next retrospective
C.
Re-estimate the story points with team members at the next iteration planning meeting
D.
Assign less complex user stories to the inexperienced software engineer at the next iteration planning meeting
A. Suggest pair programming during the retrospective
Explanation:
Skill Development: Pair programming allows the inexperienced software engineer to learn from a more experienced team member, accelerating their skill development.
Knowledge Sharing: This practice promotes knowledge sharing within the team, ensuring that skills and best practices are disseminated.
Quality Improvement: Pair programming can lead to higher code quality as two sets of eyes are reviewing the work, reducing the likelihood of errors.
Team Collaboration: It fosters better collaboration and communication within the team, which can improve overall team dynamics and efficiency.
A. Suggest pair programming during the retrospective.
If an inexperienced software engineer is identified as the source of reduced velocity, one effective way to address this issue is by suggesting pair programming during the retrospective. Pair programming involves two developers working together at a single workstation, with one writing code and the other reviewing it in real-time. This practice can help the less experienced engineer learn from their more experienced colleagues, build skills, and contribute more effectively to the team's velocity.
What the team need to do are two things:
1. Ensure that the project gets back on track
2. Help the inexperienced Engineer
A & C would be the best choices.
A. Suggest pair programming during the retrospective - would achieve both goals and is an Agile mindset to helping others develop.
B. Ask the product owner to re-prioritize the user stories at the next retrospective - No. The stories have been prioritised by the customer and this is not the problem,
C. Re-estimate the story points with team members at the next iteration planning meeting
Re-estimating will make allowances for the inexperienced Engineer and could potentially bring the velocity back on track, but this doesn't actually help the engineer develop. But having said that, isn't the estimation done based on the current ability of the team? So I changed my mind and go for C
D. Assign less complex user stories to the inexperienced software engineer at the next iteration planning meeting
C = correct.
A = pair programming wouldn't help in terms of velocity increasing.
B = PO is accountable for the PB and only the sponsor can ask for reprioritizing not the team.
C = correct. The team should re-estimate the story points based on the team's ability.
D = wrong.
This section is not available anymore. Please use the main Exam Page.PMI-ACP Exam Questions
Log in to ExamTopics
Sign in:
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.
Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one.
So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.
thewalker
8 months agohankun
1 year, 8 months agofletcher_ng
1 year, 10 months agotThye
1 year, 10 months agoPetrevski
1 year, 11 months agoInvisibleBeing
2 years, 2 months agorichck102
2 years, 9 months ago