Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Scaled Agile Exam SAFe-SGP Topic 4 Question 10 Discussion

Actual exam question for Scaled Agile's SAFe-SGP exam
Question #: 10
Topic #: 4
[All SAFe-SGP Questions]

Which reduces the cone of uncertainty?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

According to theBuild Incrementally with Fast, Integrated Learning Cyclesarticle on the Scaled Agile Framework website, convergence of requirements with designs reduces the cone of uncertainty. The article states that ''The cone of uncertainty describes the uncertainty and risk in estimates at different phases of development. The cone narrows as the project progresses, reflecting the fact that there is less uncertainty and risk as more is learned about the requirements and design of the system. The goal is to reduce the cone of uncertainty as quickly as possible by converging on the requirements and design through fast feedback and learning cycles.'' Therefore, the correct answer is A, convergence of requirements with designs. The other options are not accurate, as they are not the terms that describe reducing the cone of uncertainty. Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications (B), convergence of architectures with design sets , and convergence of flexible specifications with design sets (D) are not concepts that are used in the Scaled Agile Framework.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Pedro
6 months ago
I'm going with A. Convergence of requirements and designs? Sounds like a surefire way to shrink that cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
Viola
5 months ago
Definitely, A is the way to go for reducing that cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryann
6 months ago
Yeah, converging requirements with designs makes sense for minimizing uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lisha
6 months ago
I agree, A seems like the best option to reduce the cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Craig
6 months ago
Bingo! B is the answer. Gotta love those flexible specifications, they're like the duct tape of project management.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vivan
6 months ago
D definitely seems like the way to go. Flexible specifications and design sets are key to reducing uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
Veta
5 months ago
D) Convergence of flexible specifications with design sets
upvoted 0 times
...
Aron
5 months ago
D) Convergence of flexible specifications with design sets
upvoted 0 times
...
Norah
5 months ago
C) Convergence of architectures with design sets
upvoted 0 times
...
Hildegarde
5 months ago
B) Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications
upvoted 0 times
...
Graham
6 months ago
A) Convergence of requirements with designs
upvoted 0 times
...
Eun
6 months ago
A) Convergence of requirements with designs
upvoted 0 times
...
Shannan
6 months ago
D) I agree, convergence of flexible specifications with design sets is crucial for minimizing uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tracey
6 months ago
A) Convergence of requirements with designs is also important for reducing uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Bette
7 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. Maybe C? Convergence of architectures with design sets sounds like it could work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noel
7 months ago
I think the correct answer is B. Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications helps reduce the cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
Bettina
6 months ago
No, I'm certain it's C. Convergence of architectures with design sets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chantell
6 months ago
I still think it's A. Convergence of requirements with designs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Susy
6 months ago
I agree with you, it's definitely B. Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications.
upvoted 0 times
...
Therese
6 months ago
I'm pretty sure it's D. Convergence of flexible specifications with design sets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Twanna
6 months ago
I think it's actually C. Convergence of architectures with design sets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tran
6 months ago
That makes sense, it helps in reducing the cone of uncertainty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dierdre
6 months ago
I agree, B) Convergence of alternatives with flexible specifications is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elinore
7 months ago
I believe the correct answer is A. Convergence of requirements with designs.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77