A cross-functional agile team is preparing for their next sprint. During sprint planning, the QA specialist expresses concern that the team has been committing to user stories without adequately considering testing effort. She feels that her input is often sought too late in the process, after developers have already estimated and committed to stories. This has resulted in quality issues and testing becoming a bottleneck in the last two sprints. The team wants to improve but is unsure how to better integrate QA perspective earlier. What should the team do?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is B. Option B is correct because collaborative estimation ensures all perspectives, including testing, are considered when the team commits to work (ECO People Task 1.4 - Empower team members and stakeholders). Planning poker and similar techniques promote whole-team ownership of estimates and commitments, breaking down silos between roles. This approach embeds quality thinking from the beginning rather than treating it as a separate phase. Option C appears reasonable but still treats QA as a separate gate rather than an integrated team function, perpetuating the silo mentality. It adds process overhead without addressing the root cause of insufficient collaboration. Options A and D move the problem to different ceremonies but don't fundamentally change the collaborative dynamic needed for cross-functional teamwork.

More People Questions