A new Scrum team is struggling with the various ceremonies of Scrum. Among other things, the product owner and stakeholders find the technical architecture and design presentations during sprint reviews less than informative. What should the team do?

The primary purpose of the Sprint Review is to inspect the outcome of the Sprint and determine future adaptations. It is an informal meeting, not a status meeting, and the presentation of the Increment is intended to elicit feedback and foster collaboration. The focus should be on demonstrating a "Done," usable increment of the product to stakeholders. Discussing technical architecture is not the goal; that is better suited for internal team discussions or specific design sessions. The team should pivot the meeting back to its intended purpose of showcasing working software to gather valuable feedback on the product itself.

B. This option misses the fundamental problem, which is the incorrect focus of the meeting, not the presentation style of the technical details.
C. The Sprint Review is not the correct forum for deep technical discussions; asserting its importance in this context is a misunderstanding of Scrum.
D. Changing the audience to fit the incorrect meeting format does not solve the root cause and alienates the intended business-focused stakeholders.

1. Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2020). The Scrum Guide. Scrum.org. p. 10. ("The purpose of the Sprint Review is to inspect the outcome of the Sprint and determine future adaptations... The Development Team demonstrates the work that it has 'Done' and answers questions about the Increment.")

2. Project Management Institute. (2017). Agile Practice Guide. p. 55. ("The team demonstrates a working product increment to the stakeholders... The goal is to get feedback from the stakeholders.")