During PI Planning, Teams B and C commit to delivering by the end of Iteration Five.

A. Because Product Management accepted each team’s final plan at the end of PI Planning Day 2

B. Because the teams managed their dependencies and planned their integration timing during PI Planning

C. Because work should not be planned for the IP Iteration

D. Because each feature team needs to integrate with the component team

Correct Answer is

D. Because work should not be planned for the IP Iteration

Explanation

Planning to integrate in the first week of the IP (Innovation and Planning) Iteration is considered an anti-pattern because work should not be planned for the IP Iteration.

The IP Iteration in the context of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) serves specific purposes, including innovation, continuing education, PI Planning, and Inspection and Adaptation events. It also provides a buffer to absorb any variances and delays in the delivery during the PI. While integration work is critical, especially in a scenario with multiple teams working on different parts of the same feature, scheduling such essential integration work specifically for the IP Iteration can be problematic for several reasons:

• Because Product Management accepted each team’s final plan at the end of PI Planning Day 2: While it’s good that product management is involved and approves plans, this option doesn’t directly address the issue with planning integration work during the IP Iteration.


• Because the teams managed their dependencies and planned their integration timing during PI Planning: Managing dependencies and planning integration timing is precisely what teams should be doing during PI Planning. However, the crux of the issue is not the planning of dependencies but the timing of the integration work itself, especially its placement in the IP Iteration.


• Because work should not be planned for the IP Iteration: This is the correct reason why it’s considered an anti-pattern. The IP Iteration is intended as a buffer and for activities other than regular sprint work, like addressing unplanned work that couldn’t be completed in the allocated iterations or focusing on innovation and improvement. Planning critical activities such as feature integration during this time doesn’t align with the intended use of the IP Iteration. It risks essential work being rushed or not given the attention it requires due to the other IP Iteration activities.


• Because each feature team needs to integrate with the component team: While integration among teams is necessary, this statement doesn’t directly address why scheduling this integration specifically in the IP Iteration is problematic.

Therefore, the integration of work among teams should ideally be planned to occur within the standard iterations of the PI to ensure that there is adequate time for testing, refinement, and addressing any issues that arise from the integration without relying on the IP Iteration, which is reserved for different purposes.

Other SAFe Scrum Master Question – What is one way a Scrum Master leads the team’s efforts for relentless improvement?