Scaled Agile SAFe-SGP - SAFe 5 Government Practitioner Exam (5.0)

According to the PI Planning article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, confidence votes are taken at the program and team levels once dependencies and program risks are addressed. The article states that “After discussing plans and dependencies, each team member casts a vote, usually on a scale of 1 to 5. This collective feedback helps identify potential risks, enabling teams to address concerns and enhance their overall chances of success.” The article also states that “The RTE then facilitates a program-level confidence vote, where the Business Owners and other stakeholders assess the feasibility and economic outcomes of the plan.” Therefore, the correct answer is D, program and team. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the levels at which confidence votes are taken. Portfolio, branch, and train are not relevant terms in the context of PI planning.

According to the Government Article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, tagging backlog items with funding metadata for future reporting and calculating a fixed cost labor cost per ART based on actual salaries are two recommendations for tracking expenditures using the Program Backlog. The article states that “To track expenditures, the Program Backlog can be tagged with funding metadata for future reporting. Additionally, a fixed cost labor cost per ART can be calculated based on actual salaries. This simplifies the tracking of labor costs and allows for more accurate forecasting.” Therefore, the correct answers are A, tagging backlog items with funding metadata for future reporting, and E, calculating a fixed cost labor cost per ART based on actual salaries. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the recommendations for tracking expenditures using the Program Backlog. Organizing ARTs by funding classification (B) is not a recommended practice, as it may create silos and reduce collaboration across ARTs. Including a fiduciary expert in backlog refinement © is not a necessary step, as the backlog items should be prioritized based on value and not on cost. Using charge codes assigned by each program (D) is not a simple or effective way to track expenditures, as it may introduce overhead and complexity.

According to the Core Values article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, the three items that are part of SAFe’s Core Values are alignment, relentless improvement, and transparency. The article states that “The four Core Values of alignment, transparency, respect for people, and relentless improvement represent the foundational beliefs that are key to SAFe’s effectiveness. These tenets help guide the behaviors and actions of everyone participating in a SAFe portfolio.” Therefore, the correct answers are A, alignment, B, relentless improvement, and F, transparency. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the core values of SAFe. Decentralized decision-making is a principle, not a value, of SAFe. Program execution is an outcome, not a value, of SAFe. Assume variability is not a term used in SAFe.

According to the Government Article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, feature progress charts and burn-up charts are two visual reporting tools that can be used to help maintain fiduciary tracking of government technology programs. The article states that “SAFe provides a wide array of metrics and management tools to monitor program performance. Other metrics—such as feature progress charts, ART Kanban boards, burn-up charts, and continuous flow diagrams (Figure 3)—make program performance highly visible and transparent, enabling better fiduciary control.” Therefore, the correct answers are C, feature progress charts, and D, burn-up charts. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the visual reporting tools that can be used to help maintain fiduciary tracking of government technology programs. Detailed spreadsheets (A) are not visual tools, but rather data sources that can be used to create visual reports. Pro formas (B) are financial statements that project future outcomes, not track current performance. Integrated master schedules (E) are traditional project management tools that show the dependencies and milestones of various tasks, not the value delivery and progress of features.

According to the Adapting Governance Practices to Support Agility and Lean Flow of Value article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, the Incremental Capability Review is an objective-based progress review that replaces the traditional phase-gate reviews. The article states that “The Incremental Capability Review (ICR) is a new governance practice that provides a more effective way to measure progress and manage risk. It is based on the principle of objective evidence of working systems rather than subjective opinions and documentation. The ICR is a lightweight, collaborative, and transparent review process that aligns with the PI cadence and events. It leverages the System Demo, Inspect and Adapt, and PI Planning to provide frequent and incremental checks of the solution’s fitness for purpose and compliance with relevant standards and regulations.” Therefore, the correct answer is A, it is an objective-based progress review. The other options are not accurate, as the ICR is not the default for phase-gate reviews, it is not a document-based progress measure, and it does not ensure manual review of processes.

The Manifesto for Agile Software Development, also known as the Agile Manifesto, is a shared set of values and principles intended to improve software development1. The Agile Manifesto was created in 2001 by a group of 17 software practitioners who wanted to find a better way of developing software than the traditional, documentation-driven, and heavyweight processes. The Agile Manifesto states four values and twelve principles that guide the agile approach to software development, which emphasizes individuals and interactions, working software, customer collaboration, and responding to change2. The Agile Manifesto is not a specific methodology or practice, but rather a philosophy that can be applied to various agile frameworks, such as Scrum, Kanban, XP, and SAFe3.

1: Manifesto for Agile Software Development 2: What is the Agile Manifesto? | Agile Principles and Values - ProductPlan 3: The Agile Manifesto - Project Management Institute

One way that Lean-Agile leaders can exemplify the SAFe Core Value of alignment is by participating in backlog visibility, review, and preparation1. This means that leaders are actively involved in understanding and prioritizing the work items that deliver value to the customers and stakeholders. They also provide feedback and guidance to the teams and trains that execute the work. By participating in backlog management, leaders can ensure that the work is aligned with the vision, mission, and strategy of the enterprise or government agency2.

1: The Evolving Role of Managers in Lean-Agile Development - Scaled Agile Framework 2: Core Values - Scaled Agile Framework

According to the Visualize and Limit WIP, Reduce Batch Sizes, and Manage Queue Lengths article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, batch size optimization happens over time as teams figure out the balance between holding cost and transaction cost. The article states that “To improve the economics of handling smaller batches—and thus increase throughput—teams must focus on reducing the transaction costs of any batch. This is a continuous improvement activity that happens over time as teams figure out the balance between holding cost and transaction cost.” Therefore, the correct answer is A, batch size optimization happens over time as teams figure out the balance between holding cost and transaction cost. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the statements that are true about optimizing batch sizes for newly-formed SAFe teams in a program. Batch size is not optimized immediately by looking at transaction and holding costs (B), as it takes time for teams to understand the nature of the work, identify bottlenecks, and find the optimal batch size that minimizes both costs. Batch size is not already optimized if there is continuous flow ©, as optimization involves finding the right balance between batch size and costs, even within a continuous flow environment. Batch size is not optimized when transaction and holding costs seldom change (D), as holding costs and transaction costs can change over time due to various factors such as team size, workload, and external dependencies.

According to the Government Article on the Scaled Agile Framework website, governance in a SAFe context is a framework for decision-making to ensure programs achieve desired mission outcomes. The article states that “Governance is not the natural enemy of the lean flow of value in technology development. In fact, governance plays a vital role in many high-assurance systems where the economic and human cost of failure is unacceptable. It is merely a framework for decision-making and oversight to ensure that programs achieve the desired mission outcomes.” Therefore, the correct answer is B, a framework for decision-making to ensure programs achieve desired mission outcomes. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the definitions of governance in a SAFe context. Oversight that is provided by the PMO (A) is not governance, but a function that supports governance by providing guidance and coordination. Agency level regulations that ensure compliance with federal laws © are not governance, but a set of rules that programs must follow. Participatory budgeting events conducted twice annually by LPM (D) are not governance, but a mechanism for allocating funds based on value and strategic alignment.