CAPM Agile Frameworks and Methodologies Practice Question
An organization is scaling Scrum across multiple teams. They have dependencies between teams that cause delays. What is the most appropriate framework to address this?
⚠ Common exam trap
CAPM often tests the misconception that simply co-locating teams or eliminating dependencies entirely solves scaling issues, but the exam expects recognition that structured synchronization like SAFe's PI planning is necessary for managing dependencies at scale.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Use the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) with program increment planning.
SAFe is a widely adopted scaling framework that explicitly addresses cross-team dependencies through its Program Increment (PI) planning cadence. During PI planning, teams synchronize their backlogs, identify dependencies, and commit to a shared set of objectives for the upcoming increment. This structured coordination mechanism directly mitigates the delays caused by inter-team dependencies, making SAFe with PI planning the most appropriate choice.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Use the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) with program increment planning.
Why this is correct
SAFe's programme increment planning synchronises multiple Scrum teams, exposing and resolving cross-team dependencies during a fixed planning cadence. This directly addresses the stem's inter-team dependency delays, providing the coordination layer that standalone Scrum lacks at scale.
- ✗
Keep teams independent by decoupling all dependencies.
Why it's wrong here
Decoupling all dependencies is often technically impossible where teams share components, interfaces or release cadence, and attempting it removes the coordination that scaled Scrum provides. It would be correct only for genuinely independent products with no shared architecture, which is not the stated scenario.
- ✗
Have all teams work in the same Sprint but with no synchronization.
Why it's wrong here
Running all teams in the same Sprint without synchronisation produces concurrent work with no shared planning, review or integration point, so dependencies surface late as delays. It would be correct only where teams share a cadence but have no interdependencies, which contradicts the scenario's stated delays.
- ✗
Use a separate integration team to handle dependencies.
Why it's wrong here
A separate integration team centralises dependency resolution outside the Scrum teams, adding handoffs and queueing rather than letting teams coordinate directly through scaled events. It would be correct where dependencies are genuinely cross-cutting and specialised, but scaling frameworks instead embed synchronisation into team-level planning.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This CAPM question is part of Courseiva's 451-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official PMI exam blueprint
This CAPM practice question is part of Courseiva's free PMI certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CAPM exam.