How much of a team's lost time is its own doing? About 37 percent, by this MT247 Unit 8 analysis of nine impediments sorted by who can remove each. Searches like "mt 247 unit 8 assignment example", "mt247 unit 8 sample" and "mt247 unit 8 example" land here.
What a finished MT247 Unit 8 impediment analysis looks like
One log carries all five pages. It lists nine impediments recorded across Sprints 12 through 14, each with occurrences, developer-days lost, evidence, who can remove it and the route to that person. Four sit inside the team: pull requests waiting over a day for review, stories started without acceptance criteria, automated tests skipped and later reworked, and work in progress above three items, together costing 12 days. Five sit outside: the vice president adding work mid-Sprint, the corporate security review before each app store release, production data access by ticket to another department, legal sign-off on resident-facing wording, and a Product Owner decision overruled after planning, together 20.5 days. A summary puts the total at 32.5 of 150 available developer-days, 21.7 percent. Two short sections then assign remedies by category.
How a MT247 Unit 8 example is structured
The claim under test is stated first, in the manager's words, so the analysis can confirm or reject it rather than drift into general complaint. Every impediment then receives the same questions: how often it happened, what it cost in developer-days, what evidence shows it, and who has the authority to remove it. That last column does the sorting. An impediment the Developers could end by changing a working agreement is a discipline problem; one needing a decision from someone outside the team is an authority problem, however it looks from inside. The split, 12 days against 20.5, answers the manager partly in his favor, which the paper says plainly. Remedies then follow the category. Discipline items go to the next retrospective as measurable working agreements. Authority items go through the Scrum Master to a named decision-maker, each carrying the days it cost.
The claim, in his words
The development manager's view that the team lacks discipline is quoted at the top, so the log can test it rather than argue past it.
Who can remove it
The sorting column: an impediment the Developers could end themselves is discipline; one needing a decision elsewhere is authority, however it feels from inside.
Twelve days the team controls
Reviews left waiting, stories begun without acceptance criteria, skipped tests and too much work in progress, each fixable by a working agreement.
Twenty and a half days it does not
Mid-Sprint additions, a security queue, data access by ticket, legal wording sign-off and an overruled decision, each held by someone outside the team.
Partly right, stated plainly
The manager's claim explains a little over a third of the lost time, and the paper concedes that share before presenting the rest of the log.
Retrospective or escalation
Discipline items go to the retrospective as measurable agreements; authority items go through the Scrum Master to a named decision-maker with their cost attached.
Where marks go in MT247 Unit 8
A list of complaints with no measure of cost gives graders nothing to weigh, and impediment analyses in this unit are usually expected to quantify, even roughly. Treating every problem as the team's discipline, or every problem as management's fault, misses the separation the unit exists to test; most real cases hold both, and papers that concede the team's share read as more credible. Impediments sorted by who noticed them, rather than by who can remove them, produce the wrong remedy. Remedies assigning outside problems to the Developers, or recommending a new tool for an authority problem, repeat a classic wrong answer. A Scrum Master described as removing every impediment personally misreads the Guide, which speaks of causing their removal. Evidence missing from the log, and escalation routes naming no actual person, draw the smaller comments.
Get a MT247 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Send the case with any logs or Sprint records it supplies, plus the Unit 8 prompt and rubric. Within 24-48h a free first analysis measures each impediment, sorts it by who holds the power to remove it and routes it to that person, so the discipline share and the authority share both show.
MT247 Unit 8 questions, answered
How precise do the lost-day figures need to be?
Reasonable and sourced, not exact. Strong analyses take figures from Sprint records, blocked-item logs or the team's own notes and label them as estimates. The example counts developer-days from three Sprints of records, rounded to half days. What matters is that the comparison between categories holds up, and twelve days against twenty and a half would survive modest errors either way.
What if an impediment is partly the team's and partly management's?
Split it, or classify it by the larger lever, and say which. Mid-Sprint additions, for example, come from the vice president, but a team could also decline them by pointing to the Sprint Goal. The example classifies that item as authority, because the team tried declining and was overruled, and notes the partial team lever in a sentence.
Does the Scrum Master remove impediments personally?
The 2020 Guide says the Scrum Master causes the removal of impediments to the team's progress, which often means bringing them to whoever can act. A Scrum Master cannot personally overrule a vice president or a legal department. The example routes each authority impediment through the Scrum Master to a named decision-maker, with its cost in developer-days attached as the argument.