The stakeholder wheel is a framework used to categorize stakeholders based on their relationship to

the organization or project. It typically includes categories such as customers, partners, suppliers,

regulators, and competitors , among others.

Key Considerations:

Regulators, Compliance, Owners: While regulators and owners are valid stakeholders, "compliance"

is not a stakeholder category but rather a function or responsibility.

Competitors, Customers, Partners: These are all valid stakeholder categories commonly found on the

stakeholder wheel.

Competitors, Consumers, Providers: While competitors and consumers (a synonym for customers)

are valid, "providers" is not a standard term used in the stakeholder wheel.

Contractors, Partners, Suppliers: Contractors are not typically included as a primary stakeholder

category on the stakeholder wheel, though partners and suppliers are.

Evaluation of Each Option:

A . Regulators, Compliance, Owners:

"Compliance" is not a stakeholder category; it refers to adherence to rules or regulations.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

B . Competitors, Customers, Partners:

These are all valid stakeholder categories found on the stakeholder wheel.

Conclusion: This is correct .

C . Competitors, Consumers, Providers:

While competitors and consumers (customers) are valid, "providers" is not a standard stakeholder

category.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

D . Contractors, Partners, Suppliers:

Contractors are not typically included as a primary stakeholder category on the stakeholder wheel.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

Final Recommendation:

The list that only includes stakeholders shown on the stakeholder wheel is:

B . Competitors, Customers, Partners

The Waterfall methodology is a linear approach where requirements are defined upfront, and

changes are difficult to accommodate once the project begins. Agile methodology , on the other

hand, emphasizes flexibility and adaptability to changing requirements.

Key Considerations:

Inherent Uncertainty in Cost: While cost uncertainty exists in both methodologies, Agile does not

specifically address this drawback of Waterfall.

Inflexibility to Changing Requirements: Waterfall's rigid structure makes it difficult to incorporate

changes once the project starts. Agile addresses this by allowing iterative development and

continuous feedback.

Capturing All Requirements Upfront: Agile does not aim to capture all requirements upfront; instead,

it embraces evolving requirements throughout the project.

Stakeholder Agreement on Scope Before Work Begins: Agile encourages ongoing collaboration with

stakeholders rather than requiring scope agreement upfront.

Evaluation of Each Option:

A . The agile methodology addresses the inherent uncertainty in cost associated with waterfall:

Agile does not specifically address cost uncertainty.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

B . Agile development addresses the inflexibility of waterfall as it pertains to changing requirements:

This is the primary drawback of Waterfall that Agile addresses through its iterative and flexible

approach.

Conclusion: This is correct .

C . The agile methodology captures all requirements at the start of a project to reduce risks typically

experienced in waterfall:

Agile does not capture all requirements upfront; it embraces evolving requirements.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

D . Agile development requires stakeholders to agree to the scope of the project before the work

begins, reducing uncertainty in the design:

Agile does not require upfront scope agreement; it promotes adaptive planning.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

Final Recommendation:

The drawback of Waterfall addressed in Agile is:

B. Agile development addresses the inflexibility of waterfall as it pertains to changing requirements.

Agile requirements validation ensures that requirements are clear, feasible, and actionable before

they are implemented in an iteration. This aligns with Agile principles of delivering value

incrementally and avoiding waste.

Key Considerations:

Accurate Estimation for Sprint Planning: While estimation is important, it is not the primary purpose

of requirements validation.

Correctness of Backlog Items: Ensuring correctness is part of validation but applies to all backlog

items, not just those allocated to an iteration.

Testing Requirements: Testing occurs during or after development, not as part of validation.

Readiness for Development: Validation ensures that requirements are well-defined, understood, and

feasible before they are developed.

Evaluation of Each Option:

A . To ensure estimation for sprint planning is accurate:

Estimation accuracy is important but not the primary purpose of validation.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

B . To ensure any requirements added to the backlog are correct:

Correctness applies to all backlog items, not just those allocated to an iteration.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

C . To ensure that requirements allocated to an iteration have been tested:

Testing occurs after development, not during validation.

Conclusion: This is not correct .

D . To ensure any requirements allocated to an iteration are ready to be developed:

This is the primary purpose of Agile requirements validation—to ensure requirements are clear,

actionable, and feasible before development begins.

Conclusion: This is correct .

Final Recommendation:

The purpose of Agile requirements validation is:

D . To ensure any requirements allocated to an iteration are ready to be developed.

Prototyping is a technique used to create a working model of a system or product to validate

requirements and gather feedback. Let’s evaluate each statement to determine which are false :

Evaluation of Each Statement:

A . Suitable for waterfall requirements elicitation:

Prototyping is generally not suitable for traditional waterfall methodologies because waterfall

follows a linear, sequential approach where requirements are defined upfront before development

begins. Prototyping, on the other hand, involves iterative feedback loops, which are more aligned

with Agile methodologies.

Conclusion: This statement is false .

B . Allows an analyst to confirm their understanding of requirements:

Prototyping enables analysts to validate their understanding of requirements by creating a tangible

representation of the system for stakeholders to review and provide feedback.

Conclusion: This statement is true .

C . Only suitable for Agile project environments:

While prototyping is commonly used in Agile environments due to its iterative nature, it is not

limited to Agile. Prototyping can also be used in hybrid or iterative waterfall projects to clarify

requirements and reduce ambiguity.

Conclusion: This statement is false .

D . Enables the elicitation of usability requirements:

Prototyping is particularly effective for gathering usability requirements because it allows

stakeholders to interact with a mock-up or early version of the system, providing insights into user

experience and interface design.

Conclusion: This statement is true .

An organization chart visually represents the structure of an organization, including roles,

responsibilities, and reporting relationships. By reviewing the organization chart, Sara can learn

specific details about the sponsor of her project.

Key Considerations:

Position in the company hierarchy: The organization chart clearly shows where the sponsor fits within

the company’s structure (e.g., senior leadership, middle management). This helps Sara understand

their level of authority and influence.

Span of control: The chart also reveals how many teams or individuals report to the sponsor,

providing insight into their scope of responsibility and decision-making power.

Culture within their team: While the chart may hint at team structure, it does not provide qualitative

information about team culture, which requires direct observation or interviews.

Scope of their responsibilities: The chart outlines reporting lines but does not explicitly detail the

specific responsibilities of the sponsor.

Preferred management style: Management style is a behavioral trait that cannot be inferred from an

organization chart alone.

Evaluation of Each Option:

A . Their position in the company hierarchy:

The organization chart explicitly shows the sponsor's position in the hierarchy, helping Sara

understand their level of authority.

Conclusion: This is relevant .

B . Their span of control:

The chart reveals how many people or teams report to the sponsor, indicating their span of control.

Conclusion: This is relevant .

C . The culture within their team:

Team culture is not represented in an organization chart. It requires additional qualitative data.

Conclusion: This is not relevant .

D . The scope of their responsibilities:

While the chart provides structural information, it does not specify the exact responsibilities of the

sponsor.

Conclusion: This is not relevant .

E . Their preferred management style:

Management style cannot be determined from an organization chart.

Conclusion: This is not relevant .