Parks staff treat a method fight as “Kanban people versus Scrum people.” How should the Team Coach reframe the conflict?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Kanban versus Scrum as a jersey color is a playground fight, not a design choice. Parks work arrives how it arrives. The coach asks which method fits that arrival—not which tribe gets the clubhouse.
Full Explanation
SAFe teams choose SAFe Scrum or SAFe Team Kanban from the nature of the work—especially how work arrives—while staying on the ART cadence. When parks staff cast the choice as “Kanban people versus Scrum people,” the conflict becomes identity, not design. The Team Coach reframes the dispute as method-as-fit: reservation spikes, seasonal maintenance, and interrupt-driven field work may favor pull systems, while more planned feature slices may favor Scrum events. That reframe lets the parks ART make a working decision without splitting into tribes, and it keeps shared PI Objectives for residents ahead of jersey colors.
Declaring Scrum the only SAFe method freezes identity politics into policy and ignores work-arrival patterns that may need Kanban. Splitting the ART into identity camps institutionalizes the jersey fight and weakens shared delivery for the public. Asking HR to pick a method turns a coaching design choice into an HR ruling and keeps the identity frame intact instead of inspecting fit.
Exam caveat: both team methods exist in SAFe; the exam tests fit to work and cadence alignment, not loyalty to a tribe. Operational check: describe how parks work arrives for two weeks; if interrupt and variable demand dominate, discuss Kanban fit before arguing labels.