CTFL 2.1.6: Explain how retrospectives can be used as a mechanism for process improvement
K2Syllabus section 2.1.6
3 original PrepBench practice questions for learning objective 2.1.6 of the CTFL 4.0 syllabus. Try the examples below and check each answer against its syllabus reference.
Practice questions
Question 1
At the end of an iteration a team holds a session that only the testers attend and in which only test-tool problems are discussed. In which respect does this depart from a retrospective?
- The participants should include developers, architects, the product owner and business analysts, not testers alone
- Retrospectives should be held at a release milestone rather than at the end of an iteration
- Retrospectives exist to collect metrics rather than to hold a discussion
- A retrospective has to be led by the test manager for its results to count
Show answer
- Correct answer: The participants should include developers, architects, the product owner and business analysts, not testers aloneThe syllabus names a wider set of participants than testers alone.
- Retrospectives should be held at a release milestone rather than at the end of an iterationThe end of an iteration is one of the named occasions for a retrospective.
- Retrospectives exist to collect metrics rather than to hold a discussionRetrospectives are discussions; the results are recorded afterwards.
- A retrospective has to be led by the test manager for its results to countNo such leadership requirement is stated anywhere in the syllabus.
In retrospectives the participants — not only testers, but also for example developers, architects, the product owner and business analysts — discuss what was successful and should be retained, what was not successful and could be improved, and how to incorporate the improvements. Retrospectives are often held at the end of an iteration, so the timing here is not the problem; the narrow participation and narrow agenda are.
Syllabus section 2.1.6
Question 2
At an iteration retrospective a team agrees that gaps and ambiguities in the requirements caused several defects to be reported late, and records an action for testers to review the requirements with the business analyst before each iteration. Which typical benefit for testing does this action target MOST directly?
- Improved quality of the test basis, as deficiencies in the requirements get addressed
- Increased quality of the testware, as the test processes are jointly reviewed
- Team bonding and learning, as members can raise issues and propose improvements
- Increased test effectiveness and efficiency, as test-process suggestions get implemented
Show answer
- Correct answer: Improved quality of the test basis, as deficiencies in the requirements get addressedActing on the requirement gaps improves the extent and quality of the test basis.
- Increased quality of the testware, as the test processes are jointly reviewedTestware quality improves by jointly reviewing the test processes; this action reviews the requirements.
- Team bonding and learning, as members can raise issues and propose improvementsTeam bonding follows from holding retrospectives at all, not from this specific requirements action.
- Increased test effectiveness and efficiency, as test-process suggestions get implementedEffectiveness and efficiency rise from implementing test-process improvements; this action changes the requirements practice.
Retrospectives are critical for the successful implementation of continuous improvement, and it is important that any recommended improvements are followed up. The typical benefits for testing include improved quality of the test basis, for example as deficiencies in the extent and quality of the requirements could be addressed and solved. That is precisely what this recorded action pursues.
Syllabus section 2.1.6
Question 3
At a retrospective the team agrees that gaps in the requirements caused several defects to be found late. What must happen for this retrospective to serve as a mechanism for process improvement?
- The finding is recorded against each affected defect in the defect management tool
- The recommended improvement is followed up, and the results are recorded, normally in the test completion report
- The retrospective is repeated at the end of every following iteration until no such defects remain
- The finding is passed to the manager, who decides on behalf of the team whether the process changes
Show answer
- The finding is recorded against each affected defect in the defect management toolRecording against individual defects does not carry the improvement into the process.
- Correct answer: The recommended improvement is followed up, and the results are recorded, normally in the test completion reportThe improvement is followed up and the results recorded, normally in the completion report.
- The retrospective is repeated at the end of every following iteration until no such defects remainRepetition alone is not what the syllabus requires; the improvements must be followed up.
- The finding is passed to the manager, who decides on behalf of the team whether the process changesRetrospectives involve the whole team, and the improvements are followed up rather than delegated.
The results of a retrospective should be recorded and are normally part of the test completion report. Retrospectives are critical for the successful implementation of continuous improvement, and it is important that any recommended improvements are followed up. A finding that is neither recorded nor followed up does not improve the process, however accurate it is.
Syllabus section 2.1.6
Original PrepBench practice material, not official exam questions or exam dumps. PrepBench is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by ISTQB®.