During a 911 CAD/RMS outage, the Team Coach starts approving every pull request “to keep control.” What is the problem with that move?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
An outage is not a license to become the 911 engineering manager. Approving every pull request is command, not coaching. Keep the process and flow healthy so the people who write the code can ship the fix.
Full Explanation
During a 911 CAD/RMS outage, approving every pull request "to keep control" means the Team Coach has left the Scrum Master / Team Coach lane and taken engineering command instead of coaching process and flow. Incident pressure does not rewrite the role: the coach keeps collaboration, visibility, and recovery process healthy so the people who write and integrate code can ship the public-safety fix.
Saying pull-request approval is the Product Owner's backlog job so the coach should rank outage stories instead fails because it swaps one role collapse for another—POs own content, not PR gates, and the coach still should not become the ranking authority by default. Claiming only the RTE may approve production hotfixes fails because hotfix approval is not redefined as an RTE technical gate in place of engineering practice. Freezing the CAD/RMS backlog until the next IP iteration fails because delaying recovery for ceremony purity harms public safety.
Exam caveat: urgency justifies tighter collaboration and clearer WIP, not a coach becoming de facto engineering manager. Operational check: stop coach PR approvals, restore developer ownership of integration quality with whatever emergency review the org already defines, facilitate visible outage WIP and blockers, and keep the PO focused on ordering recovery work rather than inventing new approval hierarchies.