Correct Answer:

A Development Team claiming self-organization as a reason to stop theDaily Scrumreflects a misunderstanding of bothself-managementand the purpose of Scrum events. As a Scrum Master, I would address this through teaching, coaching, and empiricism rather than enforcement.
Daily Scrum Is Mandatory in Scrum
First, it must be made clear that theDaily Scrum is a required Scrum event. The Scrum Guide defines it as a
15-minute event held every working day of the Sprint for the Developers. Choosing to eliminate it means the team isno longer practicing Scrum, regardless of how well they collaborate informally.
Self-Organization Does Not Mean Skipping Empiricism
Self-organizing (self-managing) teams decidehowto do the work, notwhetherto inspect and adapt. Scrum events exist to upholdempirical process control. The Daily Scrum specifically enables:
* Transparencyabout progress toward the Sprint Goal,
* Inspectionof the Sprint Backlog and current plan,
* Adaptationof work for the next 24 hours.
Informal collaboration throughout the day does not replace theshared, intentional inspection momentthat the Daily Scrum provides.
The Daily Scrum Is Not a Ritual or Status Meeting
If the Daily Scrum feels like a needless ritual, this is asignal that it is not being used correctly. It should not be a status report or a meeting for the Scrum Master or Product Owner. Instead, it is aplanning event for the Developers, focused on how to best achieve the Sprint Goal.
As a Scrum Master, I would coach the team toimprove the Daily Scrum, for example by:
* Centering the discussion on progress toward the Sprint Goal,
* Making impediments and risks explicit,
* Using different formats that suit the team's context.
Risks of Removing the Daily Scrum
Removing the Daily Scrum reducestransparencyand delays inspection and adaptation. Problems such as integration issues, misalignment, or threats to the Sprint Goal may surface too late, increasing risk and waste.
Over time, this undermines predictability and value delivery.

Correct Answer:

When Developers raise the lack of certain knowledge or expertise as an impediment, the Scrum Master must address the situation in a way that reinforcesScrum principles, especiallycross-functionality, empiricism, and self-management, while also supporting value delivery.
First, it is essential to verify whether this is truly animpediment. In Scrum, an impediment is something the team cannot resolve on its own. As a Scrum Master, I would facilitate a discussion with the Developers and, if appropriate, the Product Owner to inspect whether the expertise is genuinely required to achieve the desired outcome. In some cases, the scope or approach can be adapted, or the Product Backlog Item can be refined so that alternative solutions are viable. This conversation may reveal that the need for specialized knowledge is less critical than initially assumed.
Second, if the expertise is indeed necessary, the Scrum Master should encourage the team to address the issue as across-functional Scrum Team. Scrum expects teams to have, or acquire, all skills needed to deliver value. Therefore, I would ask the Developers how they couldlearn or acquire the necessary knowledge themselves. Possible options include allocating time for learning, research, training, experimenting, or building a prototype. These activities can be planned as part of the Sprint Backlog and support long-term team capability.
Third, the Scrum Master can help the team make effective use ofoutside expertise without undermining self- management. During Sprint Planning or refinement, the team may consult internal or external experts to gain insights, validate approaches, or reduce uncertainty, while still retaining ownership of the work and the Sprint Backlog.
Finally, if none of these options resolve the impediment, the Scrum Master has a responsibility tohelp the organization support the Scrum Team. This may involve facilitating access to expertise from elsewhere in the organization or, if necessary, from outside the organization. The Scrum Master does not solve the problem personally but works to remove organizational barriers so the team can proceed.

Correct Answer:

TheSprint Reviewis a key Scrum Event that directly enablesempiricism, which is the foundation of Scrum.
Empiricism is based on making decisions using what is known, observed, and learned, supported by the pillars oftransparency, inspection, and adaptation. The Sprint Review operationalizes these pillars at the product level.
How the Sprint Review Enables Empiricism
First, the Sprint Review createstransparencyby making the current state of the product visible. During the event, the Scrum Team presents a"Done" Product Incrementthat meets the Definition of Done. Stakeholders can see and often use the actual product rather than relying on reports or assumptions. This shared visibility ensures that discussions are grounded in reality.
Second, the Sprint Review enablesinspection. The Scrum Team and stakeholders jointly inspect the Increment and assess progress toward product goals. The Developers provide context about what was delivered, what was not, and what challenges were encountered. This inspection is focused on outcomes and value, not individual performance.
Third, the Sprint Review supportsadaptation. Based on the inspection and feedback, new insights emerge about customer needs, market conditions, risks, and opportunities. The Product Owner uses this information to adapt the Product Backlog, reordering items, adding new work, or refining existing items. This completes the empirical feedback loop by ensuring future decisions are based on the latest evidence.
Impact of Development Team Members Not Attending the Sprint Review
If some Developers are not present at the Sprint Review, empiricism is weakened.
First,transparency decreases. Developers possess critical, first-hand knowledge about implementation details, technical trade-offs, constraints, and risks. Without their presence, stakeholders receive an incomplete picture of the Increment and its implications.
Second,inspection becomes less effective. Stakeholders may ask questions about behavior, limitations, or quality that only Developers can accurately answer. The absence of Developers limits meaningful dialogue and reduces the quality of inspection.
Third,adaptation suffers. Decisions about what to do next-such as changes to scope, priorities, or technical direction-depend on accurate understanding. Without Developers participating, adaptations to the Product Backlog may be based on assumptions rather than evidence, increasing the risk of poor decisions.
Finally, excluding Developers underminesScrum Values, particularlyRespect and Openness, by treating the Sprint Review as a reporting event rather than a collaborative working session. This can lead to disengagement and reduced shared ownership of product outcomes.

Correct Answer:

Scrum encourages ethical behaviour in software development by creating a framework that promotes transparency, accountability, quality, and respect for stakeholders, all of which are grounded in the Scrum Values. Rather than prescribing ethical rules, Scrum embeds ethical behaviour into the way work is organized and delivered.
First, Scrum promotes ethics through its focus ondelivering valuable, high-quality working products. The Scrum Guide emphasizes delivering usable Increments that meet a shared Definition of Done. By prioritizing quality and value for both the organization and end-users, Scrum discourages practices such as cutting corners, hiding technical debt, or delivering misleading progress, which are ethically questionable.
Second, Scrum strongly supportstransparency, a core pillar of empiricism. All significant aspects of the work-such as progress, impediments, risks, and uncertainties-are made visible through artifacts and events.
This transparency encourages honesty about what can and cannot be achieved and prevents unethical behaviour such as misreporting status or concealing problems until it is too late.
Third, Scrum encouragesaccountabilityat both individual and team levels. Clear accountabilities for the Product Owner, Developers, and Scrum Master ensure that responsibility is not diffused or avoided. Teams are accountable for delivering value, improving their way of working, and meeting their commitments. This accountability fosters ethical decision-making and ownership of outcomes.
Fourth, Scrum supports ethical behaviour throughcontinuous learning and improvement. Sprint Retrospectives create a structured opportunity to reflect on mistakes, share knowledge, and improve processes and practices. This openness to learning promotes humility, integrity, and a willingness to correct issues rather than ignoring or rationalizing them.
Finally, Scrum is explicitly guided by theScrum Values of Commitment, Courage, Focus, Respect, and Openness, which form its ethical foundation.
* Commitmentencourages teams to do what they say they will do.
* Courageenables individuals to raise concerns, admit problems, and challenge unethical practices.
* Focushelps teams concentrate on delivering real value rather than superficial outputs.
* Respectensures consideration for colleagues, stakeholders, and end-users.
* Opennesspromotes honesty about progress, challenges, and uncertainty.