Historic-preservation reviewers mock developers in Slack after every pull request. Throughput looks fine this week. What should the SM/TC address first?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Mocking a preservation pull request is not a code review—it is throwing stones at the scaffold. Tickets can still move while people stop speaking up. Respect is a core value; without it the team is just temporarily fast.
Full Explanation
Respect for People is non-negotiable for high performance. Historic-preservation reviewers mocking developers in Slack after every pull request poison safety even if throughput looks fine this week. The Scrum Master/Team Coach should address contempt culture first—tickets moving through a hostile channel is not a healthy civic delivery system.
Ignoring Slack culture if stories still close fails by concept: short-term throughput can mask burnout and hidden defects. Rewarding the sharpest mockers as quality champions fails by concept by institutionalizing disrespect as a quality tool. Moving critique to anonymous forms so mockery is harder to trace fails by concept because it may hide accountability without restoring respectful, specific feedback.
Exam caveat: SAFe and Lean emphasize Respect for People alongside flow; culture of contempt cannot be excused by green dashboards on preservation workflow tools. Critique of work remains welcome when it is specific, kind, and aimed at improvement.
Operational check: intervene on mocking behavior with clear working agreements for PR feedback, model respectful review language, escalate persistent contempt through appropriate channels, and verify developers still raise issues without fear.