SSM Practice Test 15 — 15 Questions

Question 1

A Scrum Master is facilitating the Iteration Retrospective for a team that just completed a difficult Iteration. One team member starts dominating the conversation, repeatedly interrupting others and steering discussion toward their own grievances. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master?

Choose an answer to begin — your selection is scored in the full session.

Accepted Answer

Use a facilitation technique such as a round-robin or silent brainstorming to ensure all voices are heard, and gently redirect the conversation to the team's shared data.. The Scrum Master serves the team by facilitating effective events and ensuring balanced participation. Using structured techniques like round-robin keeps the Retrospective safe and productive while preventing any single member from dominating. This allows the team to inspect its process honestly and generate actionable improvements, which is the core purpose of the Retrospective. Redirecting to shared data also helps maintain focus on systemic issues rather than personal complaints.

Answer

Interrupt the dominant member and firmly remind them that the Retrospective is not a complaint session, then move on to the next topic.

Answer

End the Retrospective early and schedule a separate one-on-one with the dominant member to discuss their behavior.

Answer

Allow the dominant member to continue, because the Retrospective is a safe space for all voices and limiting anyone could harm psychological safety.

Question 2

During a SAFe Scrum Master's facilitation of the Iteration Retrospective, the team is discussing a recent production incident. One senior developer loudly blames a junior developer for a configuration error, and the junior developer becomes visibly upset. The Scrum Master wants to maintain a safe and productive environment. What is the best action?

Accepted Answer

Intervene to stop the personal blame, remind the team of the Retrospective's focus on systemic issues, and facilitate a discussion about what process changes could prevent the error.. The Scrum Master must protect psychological safety during the Retrospective. When personal blame emerges, the Scrum Master should intervene, refocus the team on systemic causes, and facilitate a discussion about process improvements. This approach preserves safety, encourages honest reflection, and aligns with the Retrospective's purpose of continuous improvement.

Answer

Suggest that the team vote on who was responsible for the incident to settle the matter quickly and move on.

Answer

End the Retrospective early and schedule a separate meeting with the two individuals to resolve their conflict privately.

Answer

Allow the discussion to continue so the team can fully air its feelings and reach a resolution on its own.

Question 3

A Scrum Master is preparing to facilitate the team's Iteration Retrospective. Which two actions best fulfill the Scrum Master's responsibilities for this event? (Choose two.)

Accepted Answer

Encourage the team to select a small number of high-impact improvements to implement in the next Iteration.. The Scrum Master facilitates the Retrospective by timeboxing it, guiding the team to focus on actionable improvements, and helping them select a few high-impact changes. These actions ensure the event is effective and leads to tangible process improvements. Other actions, such as reporting complaints or having the Product Owner set the agenda, undermine the team's ownership and the event's purpose.

Answer

Document all team member complaints and report them to the Release Train Engineer for resolution.

Answer

Ensure that the Product Owner sets the agenda and prioritizes the improvements based on business value.

Answer

Lead the discussion by providing your own assessment of each team member's performance during the Iteration.

Question 4

During an Iteration Review, a stakeholder asks the team to demonstrate a feature that was completed but is not yet integrated with another team's component, so the end-to-end scenario cannot be shown. The Product Owner looks to the Scrum Master for guidance on how to handle the situation in the moment. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master to take?

Accepted Answer

Ask the team to show whatever portion is working and transparently state the integration dependency, then capture the stakeholder's concern as a potential new backlog item for the Product Owner to consider.. The best response is to keep the Iteration Review honest and useful: show what actually works, openly acknowledge the missing integration, and turn stakeholder feedback into an input the Product Owner can prioritize. This preserves transparency, keeps the event focused on inspecting the real increment, and respects the Product Owner's ownership of the backlog while acknowledging the cross-team dependency.

Answer

Instruct the team to skip the demonstration entirely and reschedule the Iteration Review once the integration with the other team is complete.

Answer

Direct the team to quickly build a mock integration so the stakeholder sees a complete demonstration, and note the work as a defect to be fixed later.

Answer

Tell the stakeholder that integration issues are outside the team's control and refer them to the other team's Product Owner for any questions.

Question 5

During a Daily Stand-up, a team member reports that they are blocked by a missing API from another team. The Scrum Master should take which action to best support the team?

Accepted Answer

Take ownership of the impediment, collaborate with the other team or relevant stakeholders to resolve it, and keep the team informed of progress.. The Scrum Master's core service to the team includes removing impediments. When a cross-team dependency blocks a member during the Daily Stand-up, the Scrum Master should take ownership and actively coordinate with the other team or stakeholders. This enables the team to continue delivering value and maintains transparency. Escalating immediately or just recording the issue would delay resolution and fail to support the team's flow toward the Iteration goal.

Answer

Ask the blocked member to resolve the issue directly with the other team after the stand-up, and note it for the Retrospective.

Answer

Escalate the blocker immediately to the Release Train Engineer and wait for their direction before taking any further action.

Answer

Record the blocker on the team's impediment board and continue the stand-up, addressing it only if the team raises it again.

Question 6

During an Iteration Retrospective, an Agile Team's conversation keeps drifting into a heated debate about a specific production defect and who caused it. The Scrum Master notices the team has spent 20 minutes on root-cause analysis of that defect instead of reflecting on the iteration as a whole. What should the Scrum Master do first?

Accepted Answer

Intervene gently, acknowledge the defect topic, and refocus the team on the retrospective's purpose of inspecting the whole iteration before the timebox expires.. The Scrum Master facilitates team events by protecting the purpose, focus, and timebox of the retrospective. The team owns the content, but the Scrum Master guides the process so the event inspects the iteration broadly rather than getting stuck on one incident. A gentle refocus respects the team's concern while ensuring the retrospective still delivers its intended outcome within the allotted time.

Answer

Let the discussion continue because root-cause analysis is a valuable retrospective outcome and the team owns the event.

Answer

Cancel the remainder of the retrospective and schedule a separate defect triage meeting so the team can focus entirely on the production issue.

Answer

Take over the discussion, assign corrective actions to specific team members, and close the defect topic so the team can move on.

Question 7

During the Inspect and Adapt of a PI, the ART's metrics show that a specific team's velocity dropped sharply in the last two iterations because of unplanned production support. In the problem-solving workshop, the team wants to add a root cause of 'too much unplanned work' to the ART's backlog of improvement items. As that team's Scrum Master, what is the most appropriate action to ensure the workshop produces an actionable result?

Accepted Answer

Help the team apply root-cause analysis to identify the underlying source of the unplanned work, then define a measurable improvement item with an owner and a due date.. The Inspect and Adapt problem-solving workshop exists to move from observed symptoms to root causes and then to a small set of owned, measurable improvement items. Facilitating root-cause analysis and converting the finding into a specific improvement backlog item with an owner and due date produces an actionable result. Restating the symptom, reassigning ownership away from the team, adjusting velocity, or deferring the discussion all leave the underlying cause unaddressed.

Answer

Recommend that the team reduce its planned velocity for the next PI by the average amount of unplanned work so the metrics look more consistent.

Answer

Record 'too much unplanned work' as the improvement item and assign it to the Release Train Engineer, since unplanned work is a program-level concern.

Answer

Ask the team to defer the discussion to their own team retrospective so the ART can focus the workshop on program-level impediments only.

Question 8

A Scrum Master is preparing to facilitate the team's Iteration Retrospective after an iteration in which the team missed its Iteration Goals due to several unplanned production support requests. Which TWO actions best reflect the Scrum Master's responsibilities in supporting this event? (Choose two.)

Accepted Answer

Create a safe, non-judgmental environment where the team can openly discuss what happened and identify a small number of improvements to try in the next iteration.. The Scrum Master supports the Iteration Retrospective by creating a safe, blameless environment and by ensuring the event is timeboxed and produces a prioritized set of owned improvement actions. These two actions keep the team in control of its own improvement process while making the event productive. Dictating changes, evaluating individuals, or handing facilitation to an outside role all undermine the team's ownership and the Retrospective's purpose.

Answer

Use the Retrospective to review each team member's individual performance against the missed Iteration Goals and document any shortfalls.

Answer

Invite the Release Train Engineer to lead the Retrospective so that program-level concerns about missed goals are addressed directly with the team.

Answer

Assign the team specific process changes that must be adopted in the next iteration to prevent any further unplanned support work.

Question 9

During an Iteration Review in SAFe, a stakeholder from another team questions whether a completed feature will integrate with their system. The team has not yet tested the integration. The Product Owner looks to the Scrum Master. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master to take?

Accepted Answer

Facilitate a brief discussion between the team, the Product Owner, and the stakeholder to clarify the integration risk, then help the team decide how to address it, possibly by adding it to the backlog or scheduling a spike.. The Iteration Review is a feedback and transparency event, and the Scrum Master should help the team engage with stakeholder concerns rather than deflect or abruptly change course. Facilitating a focused conversation among the team, Product Owner, and stakeholder allows the risk to be understood and addressed appropriately. The team and Product Owner then decide whether to add a spike, a backlog item, or another action, keeping ownership with those accountable for the work.

Answer

Instruct the team to stop the Iteration Review and immediately begin integration testing to resolve the stakeholder's concern.

Answer

Ask the team to add the integration test to the next Iteration backlog and move on to the next agenda item.

Answer

Tell the stakeholder that integration testing is outside the scope of the Iteration Review and suggest they raise it at the next System Demo.

Question 10

During an Iteration Review, a stakeholder asks the team to add an unplanned feature to the current iteration. The Product Owner is present and the team is mid-iteration with committed Iteration Goals. What should the Scrum Master do?

Accepted Answer

Facilitate a discussion where the Product Owner evaluates the request against the Iteration Goals and backlog, and the team assesses the impact on current commitments.. New requests during an Iteration Review should be evaluated, not automatically accepted or rejected. The Product Owner decides priority against the backlog and Iteration Goals, while the team assesses the impact on current work. The Scrum Master facilitates this exchange so feedback is captured transparently and scope decisions remain with the accountable roles rather than being forced or dismissed.

Answer

Ask the stakeholder to submit the request directly to the team's backlog tool so the team can pick it up the next day.

Answer

Instruct the team to accept the request immediately so the stakeholder sees responsiveness.

Answer

Tell the stakeholder that no changes are possible until the next PI Planning, and end the discussion.

Question 11

During an Iteration Planning event, the team is struggling to estimate a complex enabler story and the discussion has become circular and lengthy. The Product Owner is becoming impatient because time is running short. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master to take?

Accepted Answer

Suggest the team timebox the estimation discussion, capture any unresolved technical unknowns as a spike or research item, and move on to planning the rest of the iteration.. The best action is to keep the planning event productive by timeboxing the estimation debate and capturing unresolved technical uncertainty as a spike or research item. This respects the team's need to investigate, allows planning to continue within the available time, and supports the Product Owner's need for a usable iteration plan without the Scrum Master taking over estimation or scope decisions.

Answer

Ask the Product Owner to remove the enabler story from the iteration and replace it with a simpler feature so the team can finish planning on time.

Answer

End the estimation discussion immediately and instruct the team to simply accept the story without an estimate, since estimates are not required in Scrum.

Answer

Provide the team with an estimate based on your own technical experience so the planning can proceed without further debate.

Question 12

A SAFe Scrum Master notices that the Daily Stand-up has become a status report to the Scrum Master, with each person speaking only when called upon. The team members are not coordinating their work or raising impediments to each other. What should the Scrum Master do to improve the event?

Accepted Answer

Remind the team that the Daily Stand-up is for the team to coordinate and self-organize, and coach them to talk to each other rather than to the Scrum Master.. The Daily Stand-up is a team event for synchronization and self-organization, not a status report to the Scrum Master or Product Owner. When the team directs all communication to the Scrum Master, the event loses its purpose. The Scrum Master should coach the team to speak to one another, raise impediments collaboratively, and plan their day. This restores ownership and helps the team coordinate work directly.

Answer

Ask the Product Owner to attend every Daily Stand-up and assign tasks to team members based on the iteration backlog.

Answer

Replace the Daily Stand-up with a written status update in the team's chat tool so that team members can read updates at their convenience.

Answer

Start asking each team member detailed questions about their tasks to make the meeting more interactive and ensure the Scrum Master understands progress.

Question 13

A Scrum Master notices that the team's Iteration Review has become a one-way demonstration to stakeholders with little dialogue, and the team rarely receives actionable feedback. What should the Scrum Master do to improve the event?

Accepted Answer

Coach the team to frame the review around the Iteration Goals, invite targeted stakeholder questions, and use structured feedback techniques to elicit input.. The Iteration Review is an inspect-and-adapt event, so dialogue and feedback are essential. Framing the review around the Iteration Goals and using structured feedback techniques invites stakeholder participation and yields actionable input. The Scrum Master facilitates this improvement while keeping the team and Product Owner accountable for content and prioritization, rather than replacing the event or reassigning the demo.

Answer

Limit the review to a strict demonstration with no questions so it finishes within the timebox.

Answer

Replace the Iteration Review with a written status report sent to stakeholders before the end of the iteration.

Answer

Ask the Product Owner to present the demo instead of the team so stakeholders feel more comfortable asking questions.

Question 14

A Scrum Master is facilitating the Iteration Retrospective for a team that just completed a difficult Iteration. One team member starts dominating the conversation, repeatedly interrupting others and steering discussion toward their own grievances. What is the most appropriate action for the Scrum Master?

Choose an answer to begin — your selection is scored in the full session.

Accepted Answer

Facilitate a discussion where stakeholders provide feedback that informs backlog adaptation.. The Iteration Review is a cadence-based event where the team demonstrates a working increment that meets the Definition of Done and stakeholders provide feedback to adapt the backlog. The Scrum Master ensures these two actions occur by facilitating the demonstration and the feedback discussion, thereby enabling inspection and adaptation.

Answer

Postpone the review until all planned stories for the Iteration are completed, even if it delays the event.

Answer

Use the entire timebox to review the team's velocity and burn-down charts with stakeholders.

Answer

Invite only the Product Owner and Scrum Master to keep the review focused and efficient.

Question 15

A Scrum Master is preparing to facilitate the Iteration Retrospective for a team that has just finished its first Program Increment. The team is dispersed across two locations and has not yet established a regular retrospective rhythm. Which two actions best support an effective Retrospective in this context? (Choose two.)

Accepted Answer

Ensure both locations have equal opportunity to contribute by using a shared digital board and alternating the facilitator role between sites.. For a distributed team new to retrospectives, ensuring balanced participation through shared digital tools and alternating facilitation builds inclusion and ownership. Using a structured format like Start-Stop-Continue with timeboxes provides a repeatable rhythm and keeps the event focused. These actions help the team inspect and adapt effectively across locations. Avoiding PI topics or recording for later viewing would weaken engagement, while having the RTE lead with prescribed improvements would undermine team self-management.

Answer

Invite the Release Train Engineer to lead the Retrospective and provide an authoritative list of improvements for the team to implement.

Answer

Focus the Retrospective solely on the team's internal processes, avoiding any discussion of program-level issues from the Program Increment.

Answer

Schedule the Retrospective at a time that is convenient for the larger location and record it for the remote team to watch later.