SAFe-Agilist Establishing Team and Technical Agility Practice Question

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

• ✗

  Implementing stricter individual performance reviews.

  Why it's wrong here

  Individual performance reviews do not address the systemic issue of workflow congestion. They often create competition and fear, hindering collaboration. The problem of context switching is structural and requires process changes, not individual evaluation, to ensure that the team can focus on completing their shared objectives effectively.

• ✗

  Increasing the team size to handle more parallel tasks.

  Why it's wrong here

  Increasing team size usually creates more communication overhead and coordination difficulties, often exacerbating the problem rather than solving it. Focus should be on reducing the number of tasks, not increasing the number of people, to ensure that the team can deliver high-quality work without being overloaded by parallel requests.

• ✓

  Applying Work in Process (WIP) limits to the team's Kanban board.

  Why this is correct

  WIP limits force the team to complete existing work before picking up new tasks, directly mitigating context switching. This fosters a 'stop starting, start finishing' culture, which is essential for improving flow and throughput. It ensures the team is focused on delivering finished value rather than being busy with partial progress.

• ✗

  Creating a separate team for each of the ongoing features.

  Why it's wrong here

  Creating more teams increases dependencies and coordination complexity across the train. This fragmentation makes it harder to align on goals and slows down communication. The goal is to build long-lived, stable, cross-functional teams that can handle a variety of work, not to create silos based on specific project tasks.