What could be a reason for a Product Owner to delay the start of a new Sprint after the conclusion of the previous Sprint?

Question

Options

• AThe QA team has not finished testing the previous Increment before declaring it ready to ship.
• BThe stakeholders were disappointed with the Increment produced in the previous Sprint.
• CThere is no acceptable reason. A new Sprint starts immediately after the conclusion of the
• DThe Product Owner needs additional time to identify the next initiatives.
• EThere's not enough work in the Product Backlog to work on in the upcoming Sprint.

• A
  2% (1)
• C
  92% (48)
• D
  4% (2)
• E
  2% (1)

Explanation

In Scrum, a new Sprint starts immediately after the previous one ends - there is no gap, no waiting period, and no role (including the Product Owner) has the authority to delay it; this is a core rule in the Scrum Guide. Option A is wrong because QA testing and release decisions don't gate Sprint start - the Increment may already be "Done" by the team's Definition of Done regardless of shipping. Option B is wrong because stakeholder disappointment is handled through backlog refinement and Sprint Planning, not by pausing Scrum's cadence. Option D is wrong because identifying next initiatives is the Product Owner's ongoing responsibility during the Sprint, not a justification for a break between Sprints. Option E is wrong because if the backlog lacks sufficient work, that's a conversation for Sprint Planning - Scrum doesn't prescribe pausing; the team would plan with whatever is available.

Memory tip: Think of Sprints like heartbeats - the heart doesn't pause between beats, and neither does Scrum. Any answer suggesting a valid reason to delay a Sprint start is automatically wrong.

No community discussion yet for this question.