Key details for this exam, checked against the published exam outline
Each question shows the correct answer and an explanation of why it is right
SIMULATION
Your Scrum Team has one month Sprints. The development team argues that since this period is quite long, a Daily Scrum is a bit too much. They instead want a weekly update meeting. What is your opinion on this?
From a Scrum Master's perspective, replacing the Daily Scrum with a weekly update meeting is not consistent with Scrum and would significantly weaken the team's ability to inspect and adapt effectively, regardless of the Sprint length.
First, Scrum explicitly defines the Daily Scrum as a required event. The Scrum Guide states that the Daily Scrum is a 15-minute event held every working day of the Sprint for the Developers. The length of the Sprint---whether one week or one month---does not change the purpose or necessity of this event. Therefore, by choosing not to have a Daily Scrum, the team would no longer be practicing Scrum, but rather a Scrum-like process.
Second, the Daily Scrum is not a status meeting. Its primary purpose is to allow the Developers to inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal, synchronize their work, and adapt the Sprint Backlog as needed. A weekly meeting dramatically reduces the frequency of inspection and adaptation, delaying the discovery of issues such as integration problems, misalignment, or risks to the Sprint Goal.
Third, removing the Daily Scrum negatively impacts transparency, one of Scrum's three pillars of empiricism. Without daily synchronization, important information about progress, impediments, and discoveries becomes stale or hidden. This reduced transparency increases the likelihood that work will drift away from agreed standards, fail to integrate properly, or no longer support the Sprint Goal by the end of the Sprint.
Fourth, the argument that a one-month Sprint justifies less frequent inspection reflects a misunderstanding of empiricism. Longer Sprints increase risk, which makes frequent inspection and adaptation more important, not less. The Daily Scrum provides a regular opportunity to realign the team and respond early to emerging problems, thereby reducing waste and rework.
Finally, as a Scrum Master, my role is to teach and coach the Scrum Team on the purpose and value of Scrum events. Rather than removing the Daily Scrum, I would help the Developers improve how they use it---for example, ensuring it focuses on progress toward the Sprint Goal and actionable planning for the next 24 hours, instead of turning into a reporting session.
SIMULATION
The definition of "Done" describes the work that must be completed for every Product Backlog item before it can be deemed releasable. What should the Development Team do when, during the Sprint, it finds out that a problem outside of their control blocks them from doing all this work?
When the Development Team discovers during a Sprint that a problem outside of their control prevents them from completing all work required by the Definition of Done, this situation must be addressed through transparency, inspection, and adaptation, rather than by lowering standards.
1. Make the Impediment Transparent Immediately
The Development Team should make the issue visible as soon as it is discovered. This includes:
Raising it in the Daily Scrum,
Clearly stating how it impacts the Sprint Goal and the Definition of Done.
Transparency is critical so that inspection and adaptation are based on reality, not assumptions.
2. Do Not Compromise the Definition of Done
The Definition of Done must not be relaxed or bypassed to ''get something done.'' Lowering quality destroys transparency and creates false progress. If the Definition of Done cannot be met, the work is not Done and should not be considered releasable.
3. Collaborate to Adapt the Sprint Backlog
The Development Team should collaborate with the Product Owner to inspect the impact and adapt the Sprint Backlog. This may include:
Removing or adjusting affected Product Backlog Items,
Focusing on work that can still meet the Definition of Done,
Preserving the Sprint Goal, if possible.
4. Escalate the Impediment Through the Scrum Master
Because the problem is outside the team's control, it qualifies as an impediment. The Scrum Master must help remove or mitigate it by working with the organization or external parties. If the impediment cannot be resolved quickly, its impact should be addressed in planning and stakeholder communication.
SIMULATION
In what way does Scrum encourage ethical behaviour, doing ''the right thing'', in software development?
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 on delivering 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 supports transparency, 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 encourages accountability at 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 through continuous 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 the Scrum Values of Commitment, Courage, Focus, Respect, and Openness, which form its ethical foundation.
Commitment encourages teams to do what they say they will do.
Courage enables individuals to raise concerns, admit problems, and challenge unethical practices.
Focus helps teams concentrate on delivering real value rather than superficial outputs.
Respect ensures consideration for colleagues, stakeholders, and end-users.
Openness promotes honesty about progress, challenges, and uncertainty.
SIMULATION
Mid-sprint a development team forecasts it will not be able to deliver all the planned backlog items. They are worried and ask for your advice as Scrum Master. What will you tell them?
When a Development Team realizes mid-Sprint that it may not be able to deliver all planned Sprint Backlog Items, this situation should be handled through empiricism, not concern or blame. As a Scrum Master, I would reassure the team and guide them back to Scrum principles.
First, I would remind the team that in Scrum they do not commit to delivering all Sprint Backlog Items. Instead, the Scrum Team commits to doing their very best to achieve the Sprint Goal. Discovering additional work, complexity, or unknowns during the Sprint is expected, especially in complex product development. The Sprint Backlog is a forecast, not a fixed contract.
Second, I would help the team assess the impact of what they have discovered. If the newly discovered work is minor and the Sprint Goal is still within reach, the team can continue as planned while adapting the Sprint Backlog as needed. This reflects normal inspection and adaptation during the Sprint.
Third, if the impact is significant and threatens the Sprint Goal, the Development Team should have a focused discussion about if and how the Sprint Goal can still be met. This may involve changing the approach, reducing scope while preserving the Sprint Goal, or identifying alternative ways to deliver the intended value.
In such cases, the Product Owner should be involved in the conversation. Including the Product Owner increases transparency and enables faster value-based decision-making, such as re-negotiating scope or adjusting priorities while keeping the Sprint Goal intact. This collaboration ensures that adaptations are aligned with product value.
SIMULATION
The Product Owner remains distant. He/she has handed over the required Product Backlog for the Sprint but is not collaborating with the Development Team during the Sprint. What are valuable actions for a Scrum Master?
A distant Product Owner represents a risk to value delivery, transparency, and empiricism. While the Product Owner has provided a Product Backlog for the Sprint, lack of collaboration during the Sprint undermines learning and informed decision-making. As a Scrum Master, the focus should be on coaching, enabling collaboration, and addressing systemic impediments, not substituting for the Product Owner.
1. Make the Impact Transparent
The Scrum Master should help make the impact of the Product Owner's absence visible:
Reduced ability to clarify Product Backlog Items,
Slower decision-making when discoveries occur,
Increased risk to the Sprint Goal and product value.
This transparency should be established through respectful conversations with the Product Owner and, if needed, through Scrum events such as the Sprint Retrospective.
2. Coach the Product Owner on Accountability
The Scrum Guide states that the Product Owner is accountable for maximizing value and Product Backlog management, which requires ongoing collaboration with Developers. The Scrum Master should coach the Product Owner to understand that handing over a backlog at Sprint Planning is not sufficient and that availability during the Sprint is essential for empiricism.
3. Enable Better Collaboration Without Replacing the Product Owner
The Scrum Master should help create opportunities for collaboration, such as:
Encouraging regular clarification moments during the Sprint,
Improving Product Backlog refinement so fewer questions remain unanswered,
Helping Developers prepare focused questions to use limited Product Owner availability effectively.
However, the Scrum Master must not take over Product Owner responsibilities, as this would blur accountabilities.
4. Address Organizational Causes
If the Product Owner's distance is due to workload, role confusion, or organizational pressure, this becomes an organizational impediment. The Scrum Master should raise this issue with leadership and help the organization understand the risk of an unavailable Product Owner to product outcomes.
SIMULATION
"Technical debt is the sole concern of the development team". As a Scrum Master, do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?.
As a Scrum Master, I do not agree with the statement that technical debt is the sole concern of the Development Team. While Developers are responsible for recognizing and understanding technical debt, its impact extends far beyond the team and affects agility, quality, and delivery at the product and organizational level.
First, technical debt directly influences a team's ability to remain agile. As technical debt accumulates, the cost and effort required to change the product increase. This slows down development, reduces predictability, and eventually makes it difficult---or even impossible---to deliver working software within reasonable timeframes. When agility is reduced, the entire organization suffers, not just the Development Team.
Second, technical debt has a significant impact on product quality and delivery. High levels of technical debt often lead to defects, instability, and integration problems. This undermines the Scrum principle of delivering a ''Done'' Increment each Sprint. When the product cannot be reliably delivered or inspected, customers and stakeholders are directly affected, making technical debt a shared concern.
Third, while Developers are best positioned to identify when technical debt occurs, addressing it requires collaboration across the Scrum Team. The Product Owner must understand that not all work in a Sprint will result in new functionality. Investing in reducing technical debt is an investment in future value, sustainability, and delivery capability. Stakeholders also need transparency about this trade-off.
Fourth, Scrum encourages making technical debt visible and addressing it continuously, rather than postponing it indefinitely. This may involve adding technical debt--related work to the Product Backlog and prioritizing it alongside functional work. Treating technical debt as ''invisible'' or purely technical undermines empiricism and long-term value creation.
SIMULATION
Your team's Product Owner approaches you for a word in private. She expresses some concerns she has about the team's commitment and productivity. She has noticed that comparable teams within the development organization have a higher average velocity. How would you handle this situation?
When a Product Owner raises concerns about the team's commitment and productivity based on comparisons of velocity with other teams, this signals a need for coaching on empiricism, transparency, and appropriate use of Scrum metrics. As a Scrum Master, my response would focus on reframing the discussion from output comparison to value delivery and continuous improvement.
First, I would explain that velocity is a team-specific, contextual measure. Velocity reflects how much work a specific team completes within a given context, using its own Definition of Done, skills, tooling, and domain complexity. The Scrum Guide does not define velocity as a performance or comparison metric. Comparing velocity across teams is misleading and risks encouraging dysfunctional behavior, such as inflating estimates, cutting quality, or gaming the system. Therefore, a higher velocity does not automatically indicate higher productivity, commitment, or value delivery.
Second, I would explore the Product Owner's underlying concern rather than focusing on velocity itself. Often, concerns about velocity are proxies for deeper issues such as:
Missed Sprint Goals,
Unmet stakeholder expectations,
Slow value delivery,
Quality problems or unpredictability.
As a Scrum Master, I would help the Product Owner articulate what outcome they are truly worried about, and then guide the discussion toward metrics and observations that better reflect those concerns, such as progress toward Product Goals, customer feedback, Increment quality, or predictability over time.
Third, I would reinforce the importance of empiricism and transparency. If there are genuine concerns about commitment or effectiveness, these should be inspected using transparent evidence within the team's own context. The Sprint Review and Sprint Retrospective provide structured opportunities to inspect outcomes and ways of working. Rather than privately judging the team based on external comparisons, these concerns should be addressed openly and constructively with the Scrum Team.
Fourth, I would coach the Product Owner on Scrum Values, particularly Respect and Openness. Assuming lower commitment based on velocity comparisons risks undermining trust and psychological safety. Scrum encourages respecting the team as capable professionals and being open to learning what is actually limiting their effectiveness. Blame-oriented comparisons reduce the likelihood of honest inspection and improvement.
Finally, if improvement is needed, the Scrum Master should support the Scrum Team in identifying and addressing impediments. This may involve examining workload, technical debt, unclear backlog items, excessive dependencies, or organizational constraints. The focus should be on enabling the team to improve sustainably, not on pushing them to match another team's numbers.
Exam domains verified against: Official Scrum PSM-III exam guide, last checked October 2026.
Mastery of empiricism, Scrum values, team structure and accountability, events like Sprint Planning and Daily Scrum, artifacts including Product Backlog and Increment, and the definition of Done. This underpins all advanced Scrum Master work and appears throughout the exam through scenario-based questions that require you to apply framework principles to complex situations.
Advanced coaching, facilitation, and mentoring skills that help teams become self-managing. The exam tests your ability to guide team members and influence organizational culture through the Scrum values. Responses must show how you would teach and develop others as a Scrum Master in real-world settings.
Sample question from this domain above: Q2
Forecasting, release planning, product value, and stakeholder engagement. As PSM III questions often include cross-functional scenarios, this domain tests your understanding of how a Scrum Master influences product decisions and works with Product Owners and stakeholders to maximize value delivery.
Common questions about the exam itself
