The open-data team treats interest-based problem-solving as "being nice" and is ready to waive a privacy-law constraint to keep the peace. What should the Scrum Master / Team Coach coach?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Being nice is bringing extra donuts. Protecting privacy law is still non-negotiable. Interest-based solving is hard on the principle and soft on the people—not a permission slip to waive the statute.
Full Explanation
Interest-based problem-solving is not endless niceness. Teams stay firm on interests and legitimate principles—including privacy law on open-data releases—while remaining soft on people. When the open-data team treats the method as "being nice" and is ready to waive a privacy-law constraint to keep the peace, the Scrum Master / Team Coach should coach staying firm on interests and principles such as privacy law, and soft on people—not endlessly nice.
Being endlessly nice so interests bend whenever someone looks uncomfortable fails by concept: comfort is not a waiver authority for privacy statutes. Being hard on people and soft on the privacy statute fails by concept by attacking individuals while relaxing lawful constraints. Asking legal to hide the statute until after the PI so conflict disappears fails by concept: concealing constraints manufactures avoidable compliance risk.
Exam caveat: SASM borrows the firm-on-interests/soft-on-people stance; niceness that waives principles is a misunderstanding of the method. Legal partners help interpret privacy law—the team does not negotiate the statute away to reduce meeting tension on open data.
Operational check: restate privacy-law as a non-waivable principle, separate respect for people from softness on constraints, search options that publish safely within the law, involve legal as needed, and verify no "peace" deal silently drops required protections.