The chief building official asks to be named co-Product Owner of the permit product so inspections and code interpretation have equal say on the backlog. What should the Product Owner do?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Two people holding the same steering wheel is how you hit the median. Welcome the chief official into every conversation—just do not split the Product Owner job. One person is accountable for the backlog; lots of people get a voice.
Full Explanation
Scrum requires one Product Owner accountable for the Product Backlog; expertise is input, not co-ownership. When the chief building official asks to be named co-Product Owner of the permit product so inspections and code interpretation have equal say on the backlog, the Product Owner should keep single accountability while welcoming the official’s expertise. Accepting co-Product Ownership and alternating final decisions each Sprint creates split accountability and slow conflict. Moving ordering to a two-vote product committee with the official replaces empiricism with negotiation theater. Asking the Scrum Master to become a third Product Owner to break ties misuses the Scrum Master role. Exam caveat: domain authorities must be deeply involved in refinement and constraints; involvement is not dual Product Ownership. Operational check: establish a clear consultation path with the chief building official, retain final order with the Product Owner, make constraint-driven items transparent on the backlog, and inspect permitting outcomes without committee voting on every reorder. Keep civic stakeholders focused on inspectable outcomes for residents and operators rather than inbox politics or vanity metrics.