At the Sprint Review a governance lead presents a checklist and states that no Increment may go to customers until he and two department heads have signed the minutes of the Review. The Developers have built an Increment that meets the Definition of Done. How should the Scrum Master respond?

Professional Scrum Master I, objective 2. Developing people and teams hard

Machine-checked — no person has signed for it. This question was read against the source cited below by an automated pass, which found no contradiction. That is a weaker claim than it sounds: the same kind of process wrote the question, so it can confirm its own mistake.

Treat it as a good draft rather than as settled fact, and read the source below before you rely on it. It is not used in mock exams here — only questions a person has signed for are.

The options

Not correct Accept the checklist as the organisation's Definition of Done for this product

Wrong. The Definition of Done is a quality standard the Increment must meet before it is called Done, and it is applied by the Developers as they work — not a panel convened afterwards to give permission.

Not correct Add a separate approval meeting after the Sprint Review so the Review itself stays a working session

Wrong, and it is the tempting compromise because it appears to protect the event. It protects the room and keeps the gate, and Scrum's events exist precisely to minimise the need for meetings not defined in Scrum.

Correct Explain that the Sprint Review is a working session for deciding what to do next, and never a gate to releasing value

Correct. The event exists so that the Scrum Team and stakeholders inspect the outcome of the Sprint and collaborate on what to do next, not so an Increment can be approved. The Guide says outright that the Review should never be considered a gate to releasing value — an Increment may even be delivered to stakeholders before the Sprint ends.

Not correct Ask the Product Owner to obtain the three signatures before every Sprint Review so the event is not held up

Wrong. This makes the Product Owner the clerk of a gate Scrum does not have; collecting the signatures earlier keeps the gate intact and simply moves it off the agenda of the event it is spoiling.

Why

A Sprint Review turned into a sign-off gate fails twice: the inspection stops being honest, because nobody shows a stakeholder a problem in a meeting that decides approval, and the adaptation stops happening, because the outcome is a verdict rather than an adjusted Product Backlog. The Review is where the Scrum Team and stakeholders work out what to do next. When somebody asks for a gate, the useful question is what risk they are trying to manage, and whether the Definition of Done should be carrying it.

Where this comes from

Cited
Scrum Guide section Increment
What it says
The Sprint Review should never be considered a gate to releasing value.

Practise this

Reading one question is not practice. The trainer will draw a set from objective 2 and space the ones you get wrong.

Practise Professional Scrum Master I

More questions on this objective

All questions on Developing people and teams