After attending PSMI class with Gunther at Brussels I tried the PSMI again and scored only 94% (I had 96% before)
This result pissed me off. But more than that, I understood that I was really fighting against the questions, and not my Scrum knowledge leaks. Some of the questions were SO not clear that I could hardly tell what they really asked. Maybe that is due to the fact that I'm not a native english speaker and maybe I don't get a full range of tiny details in questions, maybe something else. But this is really annoying. Let me give a few samples:
1)A very simple question:
During Daily Scrum, the scrum master's role is:
teach the Dev. Team to keep the time box
facilitate discussions
other options...
The questions is extremely easy, BUT from Scrum Guide we learn that SM is optional for Daily Scrum.
So both facilitating discussions and teaching to keep the time box would be right options IF SM attends the Daily Scrum. In case he doesn't - only teaching to keep the timbox is valid. So what would be a right answer?
2) The question:
The purpose of the Sprint is to have a working increment of product done before the Sprint Review.
From Scrum Guide we learn that it's "potentially releasable increment" that Dev. Team has to deliver by the end of the Sprint. Does it mean that we can't call it just "working" in a question and thus it's wrong or? There's some strange ambiguity here.
3) Another question:
The primary reason one might choose a four-week Sprint is when the work is too large for a two-week Sprint and cannot be decomposed further.
Again, strange formulated questions... the work PRIMARY. Who has the statistics available for validating this? Is there any research showing which is the primary reason for choosing 1 month Sprints. I don't think there's anything like that available. That's why I put false, though I understand it often happens. But what the bias behind this questions - no idea.
4) As quality assurance work does not occur as part of the development work in Sprint, which benefits are lost?
QA is not about testing, controlling and validating, but about Process and improving. Thus, QA is performed during Retro each Sprint by the Scrum Team. On the other side- Quality Control is about testing and controlling the quality of the Product (not the Process). Looking at the possible answers - I could say that the answers really meant Quality Control (testing) and not Quality Assurance. That really confused me.
5) Can a team deliver a single document by the end of the Sprint if this it's what the PO asked for?
What if DoD is compatible with it and so this is the releasable increment of Done product. Again, I was confused with this question and it doesn't say anything about what the DoD is for this team. Behind that, I guess that the Development Team should only deliver the releasable potentially shippable increment of Done product by the end of the Sprint. And SM is to remind about this to the PO.
6) A Sprint Review is the only time the stakeholders and the Scrum Team meet together? Again, formally yes, because "during Sprint review the Scrum team and stakeholders collaborate about what was done in the Sprint"
Any thoughts on this?
This result pissed me off. But more than that, I understood that I was really fighting against the questions, and not my Scrum knowledge leaks. Some of the questions were SO not clear that I could hardly tell what they really asked. Maybe that is due to the fact that I'm not a native english speaker and maybe I don't get a full range of tiny details in questions, maybe something else. But this is really annoying. Let me give a few samples:
1)A very simple question:
During Daily Scrum, the scrum master's role is:
teach the Dev. Team to keep the time box
facilitate discussions
other options...
The questions is extremely easy, BUT from Scrum Guide we learn that SM is optional for Daily Scrum.
So both facilitating discussions and teaching to keep the time box would be right options IF SM attends the Daily Scrum. In case he doesn't - only teaching to keep the timbox is valid. So what would be a right answer?
2) The question:
The purpose of the Sprint is to have a working increment of product done before the Sprint Review.
From Scrum Guide we learn that it's "potentially releasable increment" that Dev. Team has to deliver by the end of the Sprint. Does it mean that we can't call it just "working" in a question and thus it's wrong or? There's some strange ambiguity here.
3) Another question:
The primary reason one might choose a four-week Sprint is when the work is too large for a two-week Sprint and cannot be decomposed further.
Again, strange formulated questions... the work PRIMARY. Who has the statistics available for validating this? Is there any research showing which is the primary reason for choosing 1 month Sprints. I don't think there's anything like that available. That's why I put false, though I understand it often happens. But what the bias behind this questions - no idea.
4) As quality assurance work does not occur as part of the development work in Sprint, which benefits are lost?
QA is not about testing, controlling and validating, but about Process and improving. Thus, QA is performed during Retro each Sprint by the Scrum Team. On the other side- Quality Control is about testing and controlling the quality of the Product (not the Process). Looking at the possible answers - I could say that the answers really meant Quality Control (testing) and not Quality Assurance. That really confused me.
5) Can a team deliver a single document by the end of the Sprint if this it's what the PO asked for?
What if DoD is compatible with it and so this is the releasable increment of Done product. Again, I was confused with this question and it doesn't say anything about what the DoD is for this team. Behind that, I guess that the Development Team should only deliver the releasable potentially shippable increment of Done product by the end of the Sprint. And SM is to remind about this to the PO.
6) A Sprint Review is the only time the stakeholders and the Scrum Team meet together? Again, formally yes, because "during Sprint review the Scrum team and stakeholders collaborate about what was done in the Sprint"
Any thoughts on this?