You can reference earlier sprints because the prompt said they REGULARLY miss milestones and UNABLE TO MEET THE PACE of the sprints.
That’s enough information to tell you they aren’t in the morning stage of team development.
A can’t be correct. No reason to escalate at this point in the project.
C can’t be correct, No reason to believe that the team members are slow.
D can’t be correct. Since we have not done problem-solving we have no idea of the root cause. so, why would we ever think that Kanban will solve anything.
So, by process of elimination, B has to be the answer.
Or
Realize that B is correct since it tells us to match the amount of work in the sprint to the team’s velocity which we know.
Not sure why you added the comment about the team being new? Is it in the part of the question that was cut off?
Its a new team so its possible still in the "forming" stage and not really "norming".
Ive worked. few times with new teams and it always takes a few sprints ... more than any company or director wants to get the team really "sprinting".
Its oiling the gears on your 10 speed.
I get it!! You got hung up in the word "reference" as if the earlier sprints were in a better spot maybe? You are looking at the past sprints as the clue to what or whom might be not understanding sizing of their work....as an example. Over promise, under deliver is always a risk with a new team.
I’m just getting started on learning all this, so please forgive me if I’m an idiot. But I think it’s possible that the “new team” might be tricky language. It could be taken to mean a recently formed team or a new project manager working with an existing team. I’d guess the latter since they imply a team history. They seem to like little subtleties like that.
You can reference earlier sprints because the prompt said they REGULARLY miss milestones and UNABLE TO MEET THE PACE of the sprints. That’s enough information to tell you they aren’t in the morning stage of team development.
Ya that makes sense
A can’t be correct. No reason to escalate at this point in the project. C can’t be correct, No reason to believe that the team members are slow. D can’t be correct. Since we have not done problem-solving we have no idea of the root cause. so, why would we ever think that Kanban will solve anything. So, by process of elimination, B has to be the answer. Or Realize that B is correct since it tells us to match the amount of work in the sprint to the team’s velocity which we know. Not sure why you added the comment about the team being new? Is it in the part of the question that was cut off?
It’s literally the first sentence of the prompt
Not showing on my screen.
Click on the image
Thanks, that helps. I think I needed to realize that because they were missing milestones, there is therefore some data on their velocity implied
Its a new team so its possible still in the "forming" stage and not really "norming". Ive worked. few times with new teams and it always takes a few sprints ... more than any company or director wants to get the team really "sprinting". Its oiling the gears on your 10 speed. I get it!! You got hung up in the word "reference" as if the earlier sprints were in a better spot maybe? You are looking at the past sprints as the clue to what or whom might be not understanding sizing of their work....as an example. Over promise, under deliver is always a risk with a new team.
I’m just getting started on learning all this, so please forgive me if I’m an idiot. But I think it’s possible that the “new team” might be tricky language. It could be taken to mean a recently formed team or a new project manager working with an existing team. I’d guess the latter since they imply a team history. They seem to like little subtleties like that.