Why Product Owner care about developers adhering to its Definition of Done? (Choose the best two options)

Question

Options

• AHe doesn't have to care. Other systems aren't very good either.
• BTo predict the team's productivity over time.
• CTo control the Total Cost of Ownership of the product.
• DTo be able to reprimand the team when they don't meet their velocity goal for the Sprint.
• ETo have complete transparency into what has been done at the end of each Sprint.

• A
  15% (5)
• B
  76% (25)
• C
  3% (1)
• D
  6% (2)

Explanation

Adhering to the Definition of Done (DoD) gives the Product Owner transparency (E) - when every increment meets the same quality standard, the PO can trust that "done" truly means done, making the Sprint Review a reliable checkpoint rather than a guessing game. It also enables predictability (B) - a consistent DoD means completed work is genuinely complete, so velocity becomes a stable metric the PO can use to forecast delivery dates and plan releases.

Why the distractors fail: A is simply wrong - the PO has a direct accountability for product value and quality. C (Total Cost of Ownership) is a plausible-sounding distractor, but TCO control is an indirect side-effect, not why the PO cares about DoD adherence in Scrum. D inverts the purpose entirely - velocity is an empirical observation, not a punitive target, and reprimanding the team contradicts Scrum's self-managing team principle.

Memory tip: Think "Transparency + Predictability = Trust" - the two things the PO needs from the DoD are to see what's truly done (E) and to plan future Sprints reliably (B). Any answer about punishment or indirect financial control is a red flag.

No community discussion yet for this question.