PMP · Question #1055
A company is transitioning from a predictive to an agile approach. During the last two sprint reviews, the product owner complained about the development team, indicating that the increments do not…
The correct answer is A. Encourage the whole team to be empowered and accountable for the decisions made according. In an agile transition with team and product owner conflicts over increment acceptance and sprint scope, a servant leader should empower the entire team to take accountability for decisions.
Question
A company is transitioning from a predictive to an agile approach. During the last two sprint reviews, the product owner complained about the development team, indicating that the increments do not meet the acceptance criteria defined in the user stories. The development team complained about the product owner, who is defining sprint backlog items, because the backlog items cannot be delivered during the 2-week sprints agreed to at the beginning of the project. How should the project manager resolve this situation in their new role as servant leader?
Options
- AEncourage the whole team to be empowered and accountable for the decisions made according
- BExtend the sprints to 3 weeks to allow the work requested by the product owner to be completed.
- CRequest that the team use the next sprint to complete all technical debt remaining from the
- DReview the organizational process assets (OPAs) to find similar situations and review the
How the community answered
(53 responses)- A77% (41)
- B11% (6)
- C4% (2)
- D8% (4)
Why each option
In an agile transition with team and product owner conflicts over increment acceptance and sprint scope, a servant leader should empower the entire team to take accountability for decisions.
As a servant leader, the project manager should foster an environment where the entire team, including the product owner and development team, is empowered and accountable for their commitments and decisions. This encourages collaborative problem-solving and self-organization to align on acceptance criteria and sprint capacity.
Extending sprints without addressing the underlying issues of unrealistic expectations or unclear acceptance criteria merely shifts the problem and does not foster true agile principles of sustainable pace and clear definitions of 'done'.
Requesting a sprint for technical debt is valuable but does not directly resolve the immediate conflict between the product owner and development team regarding sprint increments and acceptance criteria, nor does it address empowerment.
Reviewing organizational process assets (OPAs) is a predictive approach; in an agile context, the focus is on self-organization and continuous improvement within the team, guided by agile principles rather than strictly adhering to past processes for resolution.
Concept tested: Agile servant leadership and team empowerment
Source: https://www.pmi.org/agile/agile-guide/agile-practice-guide-introduction
Topics
Community Discussion
6
Mateus R.Nov 9, 2025A is the right call here. Think of it like a neighborhood potluck where one person keeps assigning dishes that take too long to cook and the cooks keep showing up with half-baked casseroles, the fix is not to extend the dinner time or dig through old recipe books, it is to get everyone in the same room to agree on what is actually realistic. In Scrum terms, the development team owns the sprint backlog and pulls only what they can finish, while the product owner refines and right-sizes the stories so they fit. As servant leader, the PM coaches the team to
Luis F.Nov 10, 2025Nice analogy Mateus, only thing I would add is that the PM should also protect the team from outside interruptions during the sprint so they can actually finish what they pulled.
Samuel O.Nov 7, 2025I first leaned toward B because extending the sprint seems like a quick fix when the team says the work won't fit, but that just masks the real issue and violates the agile principle of consistent sprint lengths. The core problem is the PO dictating sprint backlog items instead of letting the development team pull the work they can realistically commit to, which is exactly what option A addresses. In my own transition to agile practices, I have seen this same dynamic where a former predictive-style manager turned PO tries to assign work like a task list, and the fix is always coaching everyone on their proper roles. The servant
Lena V.Oct 18, 2025A is the PMP pick: servant leader empowers the team. Who actually owns the sprint backlog?
Luis F.Oct 19, 2025Good catch on A, and the Development Team owns the sprint backlog, not the Scrum Master or PO.
Luis F.Oct 28, 2025Got A on my exam about two months ago and the wording was almost identical, super tricky. The big thing here is that the PO is defining sprint backlog items which is a big red flag, because in Scrum the dev team pulls the work and figures out how much they can handle. As a servant leader the PM needs to step back and help the team become self-organizing and accountable rather than just extending sprints or jumping into technical debt. Option B is tempting if you are used to predictive thinking but longer sprints do not fix a broken process where the PO is overstepping.