The emergency-alert team thanks people who bring dissenting data. What should the Scrum Master / Team Coach recognize?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Thanking the person who brought the ugly alert data is how you get the next ugly alert in time. Rewarding dissent is not niceness theater—it is a conflict behavior that keeps the emergency-alert room honest.
Full Explanation
When an emergency-alert team thanks people who bring dissenting data, the Scrum Master / Team Coach should recognize that rewarding transparency and dissent improves conflict quality. Public-safety alerting depends on someone being willing to challenge a bad assumption before residents receive a wrong message. Thanking dissenters for "making trouble" and stopping the practice teaches silence and raises the chance of groupthink in crisis. Restricting thanks so only the Release Train Engineer may acknowledge disagreement centralizes psychological safety in the wrong role. Filing dissent only in a confidential HR folder removes it from the team conversation where operational learning happens. Exam caveat: SASM productive conflict behaviors include rewarding transparency and dissent; punishing dissent, RTE-only acknowledgment, and HR-only filing are distractors. Operational check: explicitly thank the person who brought contradictory alert data, capture the learning in the working agreement or Definition of Done, verify the team still invites dissent in the next review, and confirm no retaliatory behavior follows. Revisit after a live alert event whether dissenting data still surfaces early enough to protect residents.