People — Leading Projects →easyMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

PMP People — Leading Projects Practice Question

You are managing an agile software development team. In the last three sprints, the team's velocity has dropped from 30 to 22 story points. The team members are experienced but seem demotivated. What is the BEST action to take?

⚠ Common exam trap

The trap here is that candidates often jump to a 'command-and-control' solution (like reassigning work or replacing team members) because they misinterpret a velocity drop as a performance issue, rather than recognizing it as a signal for process improvement through the retrospective.

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

✓

Conduct a retrospective to identify and address the root causes of the drop

The team's velocity drop and demotivation are symptoms of underlying issues that need to be uncovered through a retrospective. In agile, the retrospective is the primary mechanism for continuous improvement, allowing the team to inspect its processes, identify root causes (e.g., technical debt, unclear requirements, or interpersonal friction), and adapt. Reassigning work or replacing team members would bypass the team's self-organization and likely worsen morale, while increasing sprint length treats a symptom without addressing the cause.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

✗
Reassign work to individual contributors to increase accountability
Why it's wrong here
Reassigning work to individual contributors fundamentally contradicts agile principles of collective ownership and self-organizing teams. This approach fragments accountability, reduces critical knowledge sharing, and prevents the team from swarming on complex problems, thereby hindering overall flow and potentially exacerbating velocity issues rather than resolving them through genuine collaboration.
✗
Increase the sprint length to give the team more time
Why it's wrong here
Increasing sprint length is a superficial remedy that fails to address the underlying causes of a velocity drop. While it might temporarily alleviate pressure, it often reduces urgency, delays crucial feedback loops, and masks process inefficiencies, ultimately postponing the necessary inspection and adaptation required to improve team performance sustainably in an agile environment.
✓
Conduct a retrospective to identify and address the root causes of the drop
Why this is correct
Conducting a retrospective is the most appropriate agile response, as it directly embodies the 'inspect and adapt' principle. This dedicated team event provides a structured, collaborative forum for identifying the root causes of the velocity drop, analyzing process impediments, and collectively committing to actionable improvements for future sprints, fostering continuous learning and team empowerment.
✗
Replace two team members with more productive resources
Why it's wrong here
Replacing team members is a drastic and highly disruptive measure that typically harms team cohesion and long-term productivity. Agile teams thrive on stability and trust; introducing new members disrupts established dynamics, erodes psychological safety, and necessitates significant onboarding, which often further decreases velocity and morale without addressing the systemic issues causing the initial performance decline.

Go deeper

PMP People — Leading Projects Practice Question

Why each option matters

Option-by-option breakdown

Related to this question