SSM Introducing Scrum in SAFe Practice Question
During a SAFe Scrum team's Retrospective, several team members express frustration that the Product Owner frequently changes priorities mid-iteration, causing unfinished work. The Scrum Master wants to address this systematically. What is the most effective action to take?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is thinking that escalation or framework change is the first step, rather than facilitating a team-level solution.
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 a discussion with the Product Owner and team to establish a working agreement on mid-iteration scope changes.
The Scrum Master should facilitate the creation of a working agreement between the team and Product Owner to manage mid-iteration changes. This collaborative approach addresses the root cause, respects the Product Owner's role, and empowers the team to protect its iteration goal. It also builds a healthier working relationship and promotes self-organization.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Instruct the team to ignore any requests from the Product Owner until the next iteration.
Why it's wrong here
Simply ignoring the Product Owner creates conflict and does not solve the underlying issue. The Scrum Master should facilitate communication and agreement, not impose a unilateral rule. This approach undermines the Product Owner's role and may prevent legitimate priority adjustments that are necessary for business value.
- ✗
Recommend that the team adopt Kanban instead of Scrum to handle changing priorities more flexibly.
Why it's wrong here
Switching frameworks is a drastic overreaction and not within the Scrum Master's remit to decide unilaterally. The issue is about managing mid-iteration changes, which can be addressed within Scrum through working agreements and coaching. Kanban may not align with the ART's cadence and could introduce new problems.
- ✗
Escalate the issue to the Release Train Engineer to enforce a change freeze during iterations.
Why it's wrong here
Escalation to the RTE may be appropriate if the issue cannot be resolved within the team, but it is premature. The Scrum Master should first help the team and Product Owner find a solution. A top-down change freeze may be impractical and does not build the team's ability to manage change collaboratively.
- ✓
Facilitate a discussion with the Product Owner and team to establish a working agreement on mid-iteration scope changes.
Why this is correct
Establishing a working agreement collaboratively addresses the root cause and empowers the team to self-organize. The Scrum Master should coach the team and Product Owner to define clear boundaries for when changes are acceptable, such as emergency fixes, and how to handle them. This fosters transparency and trust while protecting the iteration goal.
About these practice questions
One of 385 original SSM practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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 Scaled Agile exam blueprint
This SSM practice question is part of Courseiva's free Scaled Agile 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 SSM exam.