Home › PSPO II › Practice questions › Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

PSPO II · Scrum.org · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement · Bank updated 2026-10-21

PSPO II practice questions: Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

5 free questions from 15 on this area · answer and explanation for each · no sign-up

These 5 questions come from the Stakeholder and Customer Engagement section of our PSPO II bank (15 questions on this area, which carries 15% of the real exam). Every question is original, with the correct answer explained and linked to the source it is drawn from.

Try 6 free PSPO II questions → All PSPO II sample questions

Free: 6 questions in study mode, no card. All 15 Stakeholder and Customer Engagement questions and the full PSPO II bank: $15 one-time.

1/5 · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement · easy

A senior VP repeatedly asks for private, ad hoc demos before every Sprint Review, bypassing the rest of the Scrum Team and stakeholders, so she can be 'first to know.' Which response is most consistent with the Scrum Guide (2020)?

ADelegate the private demos to a Developer before each Sprint Review so the Product Owner can stay focused on Product Backlog refinement, while the VP still sees every Increment first and the rest of the stakeholders wait for the event.

BDecline any contact with her outside formal Scrum events such as the Sprint Review, since Scrum confines Product Owner conversations with stakeholders to its events, so she has to wait for the Sprint Review like everyone else.

CExplain that the Sprint Review is the collaborative event where the Scrum Team and stakeholders inspect the Increment together, invite her to attend and engage there, and offer another channel for general Product Goal updates if needed.

DAgree to the private demo before each Sprint Review, since keeping a powerful stakeholder satisfied protects the roadmap's political support, and the Sprint Review itself still happens afterwards for the Scrum Team and the remaining stakeholders.

Answer: C. The Sprint Review exists precisely so the Scrum Team and stakeholders can inspect the outcome of the Sprint together and collaboratively determine next steps. Private ad hoc demos to a single stakeholder fragment that shared understanding and can create inconsistent expectations. The Product Owner's role is to channel stakeholder engagement into transparent, collective forums, not to grant special back-channel access. Source: the Scrum Guide (2020) + Scrum.org's Product Owner Learning Path and the Evidence-Based Management Guide — Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

2/5 · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

A key enterprise customer demands a written commitment to exactly twelve named features by a fixed date six months out, threatening to cancel the contract otherwise. Which response best aligns with Scrum's empirical approach?

ASign the commitment as written, since large contracts require certainty, and direct the team to work overtime to guarantee the date.

BHand the negotiation entirely to the Scrum Master, since managing stakeholder conflict is a Scrum Master accountability rather than the Product Owner's.

CShare the current empirical forecast based on team performance data, negotiate around the Product Goal, offer a forecast range for the highest-value items, and agree to revisit progress each Sprint so scope can adapt to new evidence.

DRefuse to discuss any timelines at all, since Scrum prohibits date-based commitments and only the Sprint is a valid unit of planning.

Answer: C. EBM emphasizes using empirical evidence — such as historical velocity and forecast ranges — to have honest conversations about likely Time-to-Market rather than making speculative fixed commitments. Negotiating around outcomes and the Product Goal, with a cadence of re-forecasting each Sprint, protects both customer trust and the team's ability to adapt to new information. Source: the Scrum Guide (2020) + Scrum.org's Product Owner Learning Path and the Evidence-Based Management Guide — Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

3/5 · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement · hard

Mid-Sprint, the Product Owner is running customer discovery interviews in parallel with the Development Team's work toward the current Sprint Goal (a checkout redesign). Early, limited signals suggest the current approach may not be optimal, but the evidence is not yet conclusive, and stakeholders expect the increment on schedule. What is the most appropriate action?

AImmediately redirect the Development Team mid-Sprint to the new approach, since customer evidence should always override an existing Sprint plan.

BAsk the Scrum Master to decide whether to change direction, since the Scrum Master is accountable for the effectiveness of the Scrum Team's practices.

CLet the current Sprint continue toward its Sprint Goal, continue discovery in parallel, and use the resulting evidence to inform the ordering and content of future Product Backlog items and Sprint Goals.

DIgnore the discovery findings entirely until the whole release finishes, so the Development Team's plan and stakeholder expectations remain undisturbed.

Answer: C. The Sprint Goal exists to give the Sprint coherence and focus, and Scrum does not expect the team to pivot on every early, inconclusive signal. The appropriate empirical response is to let the Sprint proceed, keep discovery running in parallel, and let stronger evidence shape upcoming Product Backlog ordering and future Sprint Goals — reserving Sprint cancellation for when the Sprint Goal is truly obsolete. Source: the Scrum Guide (2020) + Scrum.org's Product Owner Learning Path and the Evidence-Based Management Guide — Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

4/5 · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement · hard

Two Scrum Teams share ownership of a single product used by both an internal operations business unit and an external customer segment. The operations leader insists their requests must always rank first because they 'fund the team,' while customer segment leads argue external revenue should always dominate. As the sole Product Owner for this product, what is the most defensible approach under Scrum?

AMaintain two separate Product Backlogs, one per business unit, each with Product Owner authority delegated to the respective unit leader, and reconcile the two orderings at Sprint Planning so that the operations leader and the customer segment leads both keep control of their own priorities.

BGive standing priority to whichever unit generates more direct revenue (the external customer segment today, the operations unit if its funding grows), since Current Value is defined strictly by revenue figures alone and revenue is the evidence EBM treats as most objective.

CAlternate ordering between the two units' requests every other Sprint so influence remains balanced regardless of expected value, and explain the rotation transparently to both groups so that neither the operations leader nor the customer segment leads can claim any standing priority over the other group's requests.

DMaintain a single ordered Product Backlog, order items by expected overall value toward the Product Goal using available evidence (such as expected impact on Current Value, Unrealized Value, and Time-to-Market), and transparently explain the rationale to both groups rather than granting either standing priority.

Answer: D. Scrum expects a single ordered Product Backlog managed by one accountable Product Owner, even when multiple business units compete for priority. EBM's Key Value Areas give the Product Owner an evidence-based, value-maximizing rationale to explain ordering decisions transparently, rather than defaulting to political leverage, rotation schemes, or an oversimplified single financial metric. Source: the Scrum Guide (2020) + Scrum.org's Product Owner Learning Path and the Evidence-Based Management Guide — Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

5/5 · Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

Midway through a Sprint, market conditions shift dramatically and the Sprint Goal becomes clearly obsolete; a major customer is demanding an entirely different feature set start immediately. What is the Scrum-consistent path forward?

AThe Product Owner has the authority to cancel the Sprint because the Sprint Goal is obsolete, then works with the Scrum Team to plan a new Sprint with a Sprint Goal reflecting updated priorities.

BThe Scrum Master should cancel the Sprint, since they own the Scrum process and its events.

CThe Developers should unilaterally abandon the current Sprint Backlog and start the customer's new request without formally ending the Sprint.

DThe Scrum Team must complete the current Sprint regardless of the obsolete Sprint Goal, since only a Sprint's natural end can trigger replanning.

Answer: A. The Scrum Guide (2020) explicitly addresses this exact scenario: a Sprint can be cancelled if the Sprint Goal becomes obsolete, and only the Product Owner holds the authority to do so. This preserves accountability while allowing the Scrum Team to replan around a Sprint Goal that reflects the new reality. Source: the Scrum Guide (2020) + Scrum.org's Product Owner Learning Path and the Evidence-Based Management Guide — Stakeholder and Customer Engagement

Try 6 more free PSPO II questions → See the whole PSPO II bank

Other PSPO II areas

The same kind of free sample for every other section of the PSPO II bank:

Product Vision and Business Strategy15 q Product Value and Backlog Management at Scale16 q Forecasting and Release Strategy16 q Evidence-Based Management16 q Portfolio Planning14 q Organizational Design and Culture14 q

Practise PSPO II with instant feedback

6 free questions in study mode · no card · full PSPO II bank with area filters and the error log: $15 one-time · no dumps, no ads.

Start PSPO II free →