Your hybrid project uses time-boxed iterations for software development and a phase-gate approach for hardware components. During iteration review, the team demonstrates completed software features, but stakeholders from the hardware division express concern that integration testing cannot occur until their component passes the design gate in 6 weeks. The software features cannot be released independently and are accumulating as technical inventory. Velocity metrics show the team is productive, but no value is being delivered to customers. What is the most appropriate action?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is C. This scenario tests understanding of hybrid project optimization when different lifecycles create integration challenges. Option C is correct because rolling wave planning allows progressive elaboration while establishing synchronization points between the predictive hardware track and iterative software track, and cross-functional ceremonies ensure alignment without abandoning the appropriate lifecycle for each component. Option B is wrong because hardware development often legitimately requires predictive approaches due to physical constraints, regulatory requirements, or manufacturing lead times—forcing an inappropriate methodology creates different problems. Option A ignores the value delivery problem, and Option D treats a systemic integration issue as a resourcing problem. The key is adapting the cadence and integration approach while respecting the valid reasons each track uses its methodology.

More Process Questions