Process — Managing Technical Aspects →easyMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

PMP Process — Managing Technical Aspects Practice Question

During a sprint retrospective, the team identifies that their velocity has been declining over the last three sprints. They attribute it to increasing technical debt and lack of automated testing. As the Scrum Master, what is the BEST action to take?

⚠ Common exam trap

A common mix-up: candidates choose to escalate (Option B) or adjust scope (Option A) because they mistake a team-level process problem for a management or requirements issue, failing to recognize that the Scrum Master should empower the team to solve its own technical impediments.

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

✓

Facilitate the team in developing an action plan to reduce technical debt and improve testing

D is correct because the Scrum Master's primary role is to facilitate the team's continuous improvement. By guiding the team to create an action plan to reduce technical debt and improve automated testing, you address the root cause of declining velocity—poor code maintainability and lack of regression safety—rather than just treating the symptom. This aligns with the Scrum principle of self-organization and the empirical process control of inspect and adapt.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

✗
Ask the product owner to reduce scope in future sprints
Why it's wrong here
Asking the Product Owner to reduce scope in future sprints is a symptomatic response that fails to address the underlying process inefficiencies identified by the team, such as technical debt and inadequate testing. This approach merely shifts the burden or masks the team's capacity issues rather than empowering them to improve their engineering practices. A Scrum Master's primary role is to facilitate the team in resolving impediments and enhancing their own delivery capabilities.
✗
Report the velocity decline to senior management
Why it's wrong here
Reporting a velocity decline to senior management as an immediate action bypasses the Scrum team's self-organizing capabilities and the purpose of the Sprint Retrospective. While transparency is valuable, the Scrum Master's initial responsibility is to facilitate the team in inspecting their process and adapting to resolve identified issues internally. Escalation without first empowering the team to address their own challenges undermines their autonomy and the principles of continuous improvement.
✗
Add more stories to the next sprint to increase velocity
Why it's wrong here
Adding more stories to the next sprint to artificially "increase velocity" is a counterproductive measure that directly contradicts the principles of sustainable pace and quality. Without addressing the root causes of technical debt and poor testing, increasing the workload will inevitably exacerbate existing quality issues, lead to more rework, and further depress actual productivity. Velocity is an emergent property of the team's capacity and process, not a metric to be manipulated by simply adding more work.
✓
Facilitate the team in developing an action plan to reduce technical debt and improve testing
Why this is correct
Facilitating the team in developing an action plan to reduce technical debt and improve testing is the most appropriate and effective Scrum Master action. This directly addresses the identified root causes of the team's challenges, aligning with the Scrum Master's role as a servant-leader who empowers the team to continuously inspect and adapt their process. By guiding the team to create their own solutions, the Scrum Master fosters self-organization and sustainable improvement in product quality and delivery.

Go deeper

PMP Process — Managing Technical Aspects Practice Question

Why each option matters

Option-by-option breakdown

Related to this question