Sprint Review: Demonstrating the Increment and Updating Direction

What the Sprint Review Is (and What It Is Not)

The Sprint Review is a working session where the Scrum Team and stakeholders inspect the current Increment, discuss what it means for the Product Goal, and decide what to do next. The output is clarity: updated direction and actionable changes to the Product Backlog based on real evidence from the Sprint.

It is not a sign-off gate, a performance evaluation, or a slide presentation about what “should” work. The Review is about what actually exists and can be used, plus what you learned from showing it.

Typical outcomes you should expect

• Stakeholder feedback tied to real use cases (what helps, what confuses, what is missing).
• Shared understanding of progress toward the Product Goal (are we closer, and how do we know?).
• Concrete Product Backlog updates: new items, changed priorities, clarified acceptance notes, removed assumptions, or re-ordered work.
• New risks and opportunities surfaced (technical, market, compliance, operational).

Preparing a Usable Increment (So the Review Can Be Real)

A Review works best when the Increment is usable and easy to explore. “Usable” means stakeholders can meaningfully interact with it (or see it operate end-to-end) without relying on imagination.

Preparation checklist (1–2 days before)

• Choose the demo path: Identify 2–4 realistic scenarios that show the most important changes. Each scenario should start from a user goal and end with an observable result.
• Verify the environment: Ensure the Increment is available in a stable place (staging, test environment, feature flag on, demo dataset loaded). Avoid “it works on my machine.”
• Prepare data and accounts: Create demo users, permissions, sample orders, realistic records, or test devices so the flow is smooth.
• Confirm what is actually in the Increment: Align within the Scrum Team on what will be shown and what will not be shown. If something is incomplete, decide whether it will be excluded or shown explicitly as “not done.”
• Collect evidence of outcomes: If relevant, bring lightweight metrics (e.g., page load time improved, error rate reduced, support tickets trend) to support discussion about progress and trade-offs.
• Invite the right stakeholders: People who can provide feedback or make decisions about direction (users, customer reps, sales, compliance, operations). Keep the group small enough for discussion.

Quick “usability” test

Ask someone not involved in building the feature to try the main scenario in the demo environment. If they get stuck, the Review will likely turn into explanation rather than inspection. Fix the friction or adjust the scenario.

Demo Principles: Show Real Scenarios, Not Slides

The most effective Sprint Reviews demonstrate the Increment by walking through real scenarios. Slides can support context, but they should not replace the product. Stakeholders should leave with a clear sense of what changed and what it enables.

Continue in our app.

• Listen to the audio with the screen off.
• Earn a certificate upon completion.
• Over 5000 courses for you to explore!

Or continue reading below...

Download the app

Principles for a strong demo

• Start with the user goal: “A customer wants to update their delivery address after ordering.”
• Show the end-to-end flow: Include the parts that matter: UI, system behavior, notifications, audit logs, integrations, or operational steps.
• Make it observable: Show outcomes: confirmation messages, updated records, emails sent, reports updated, logs created.
• Be honest about constraints: If something is behind a feature flag, say so. If there are known limitations, call them out as learning points.
• Keep it interactive: Pause for questions after each scenario, not only at the end.

Example: turning a vague feature into a demo scenario

Running the Sprint Review: A Practical Agenda That Produces Next Steps

The Review should be structured enough to stay outcome-focused, but flexible enough to follow valuable discussion. The goal is to turn inspection into decisions and backlog changes.

Step-by-step agenda (60–90 minutes example)

1. Set the purpose and timebox (5 min)

   • Remind everyone: inspect the Increment, discuss progress toward the Product Goal, adapt the Product Backlog.
   • Confirm what decisions you want by the end (e.g., priority shifts, next experiments, release considerations).

2. Context: where we are and what changed (5–10 min)

   • Briefly state the Product Goal and what the Sprint aimed to achieve (without rehashing planning details).
   • Call out any major constraints encountered that affect direction (e.g., regulatory change, dependency delay).

3. Demonstrate the Increment via scenarios (25–45 min)

   • Run 2–4 scenarios.
   • After each scenario: ask targeted questions (see next section).

4. Discuss progress toward the Product Goal (10–15 min)

   • What evidence suggests we are closer (or not)?
   • What assumptions were validated or invalidated?
   • What new risks/opportunities emerged?

5. Adapt the Product Backlog live (10–20 min)

   • Capture new items and changes as they arise.
   • Re-order based on stakeholder input and Product Goal alignment.
   • Clarify acceptance notes, constraints, and open questions.

6. Confirm actionable next steps (5 min)

   • Summarize the top backlog changes and any follow-up needed (e.g., user interviews, technical spike, compliance review).
   • Confirm who will provide additional input and by when.

Gathering Stakeholder Feedback That You Can Act On

Feedback is only useful if it is specific enough to change the Product Backlog. The facilitator (often the Scrum Master) can help turn opinions into actionable information, while the Product Owner steers the conversation toward value and Product Goal alignment.

Questions that produce actionable feedback

• Value and fit: “Which user problem does this solve best? Which user segment benefits most?”
• Behavior and usability: “Where did you hesitate or feel uncertain? What would you expect to happen next?”
• Outcomes: “If we shipped this, what would success look like in two weeks?”
• Trade-offs: “If we can only improve one thing next, what matters most: speed, accuracy, discoverability, or compliance?”
• Edge cases: “What real-world scenario would break this for your team?”

Techniques to avoid vague feedback

• Ask for examples: When someone says “This is confusing,” ask “Which step?” and “What would you expect instead?”
• Separate preference from requirement: “Is this a must-have for launch, or a nice-to-have?”
• Capture constraints explicitly: “Legal requires an audit log for every refund approval.” Turn it into backlog notes and acceptance constraints.
• Timebox deep dives: If a topic needs more exploration, create a follow-up item rather than consuming the whole Review.

Discussing Progress Toward the Product Goal (Without Turning It Into Status Reporting)

Progress discussion should connect what was demonstrated to the Product Goal. This is not a “percent complete” report; it is an inspection of whether the product is moving in the right direction based on evidence.

Ways to ground the discussion in evidence

• Behavioral evidence: Stakeholders try the flow and identify friction points.
• Operational evidence: Monitoring, logs, or support workflow impact.
• Business evidence: Early pilot results, sales feedback, churn reasons, or conversion proxies (when available).

Example prompts that connect Increment to Product Goal

• “What part of the Product Goal does this Increment advance most?”
• “What did we learn that changes what we should do next?”
• “What is the next biggest uncertainty we should reduce?”

Updating the Product Backlog Based on What Was Learned

The Review should end with a Product Backlog that reflects new knowledge. This does not require perfect detail, but it does require clear changes: new items, re-ordering, clarified constraints, and removed assumptions.

Common types of backlog updates during/after the Review

• New Product Backlog Items: Features, experiments, compliance needs, operational tooling, or documentation needs discovered during inspection.
• Re-ordering: Moving items up/down based on stakeholder value, risk, or urgency.
• Refinement notes: Add acceptance notes, examples, edge cases, and constraints directly to items.
• Splitting: Break a large item into smaller outcomes (e.g., “basic flow” vs “edge cases” vs “admin controls”).
• Removing or de-scoping: If feedback shows low value, remove items or reduce scope to focus on what matters.

Live capture format (example)

Feedback: Support agents need to see refund reason codes in the customer timeline. Action: Add PBI: “Show refund reason code in timeline” Notes: Must be visible to Support role; include timestamp; audit-friendly. Priority: High (reduces handling time). Owner for follow-up input: Support lead by Friday.

Definition of a good Review outcome

• Everyone understands what is usable now (not what is promised).
• Key feedback is captured as backlog changes, not as scattered notes.
• There is a clear sense of what to explore or build next to advance the Product Goal.

Guidance for New Team Members: Presenting Work, Handling Questions, Capturing Outcomes

How to present your work effectively

• Anchor to a scenario: Describe the user goal in one sentence, then show it.
• Narrate decisions briefly: Mention one or two key choices (e.g., “We chose this layout to reduce steps”), then let stakeholders react.
• Show the “happy path” first: Then show one meaningful edge case if time allows.
• Keep the pace: If setup takes time, prepare the state in advance (pre-created records, open tabs, ready devices).

How to handle questions without derailing the Review

• Clarify the intent: “Are you asking how it works today, or what we plan next?”
• Answer briefly, then return to the scenario: Park deep technical discussion for a follow-up if it doesn’t affect direction.
• Be transparent: If you don’t know, say so and capture it as a follow-up question.
• Translate feedback into backlog language: “So the need is: bulk edit for 50+ items, with validation and an undo option.”

How to capture outcomes during the meeting

• Use a visible capture method: A shared screen with the Product Backlog or a dedicated “Review notes” section linked to backlog items.
• Record decisions, not just comments: “Re-order X above Y because compliance deadline.”
• Tag follow-ups: Who will provide more detail, and by when.
• Separate: (a) backlog changes, (b) open questions, (c) risks/constraints.

Pitfalls to Avoid (Especially the “Sign-Off Meeting” Trap)

Treating the Sprint Review as a sign-off gate

When the Review becomes “approve/reject,” stakeholders may focus on policing scope rather than collaborating on direction. Instead, treat the Review as a learning and adaptation event: inspect what is usable, then decide what to do next.

Other common pitfalls and how to prevent them

• Demoing slides instead of the product: Prevent by preparing a stable demo environment and scenario-based walkthroughs.
• Hiding unfinished work: Prevent by being explicit about what is in the Increment and what is not; only demonstrate what is usable.
• Turning it into a status meeting: Prevent by spending most time on inspection of the Increment and stakeholder discussion, not reporting.
• Letting one stakeholder dominate: Prevent by timeboxing, rotating who gives feedback, and asking quieter participants direct questions.
• Capturing feedback but not changing the backlog: Prevent by updating the Product Backlog live and confirming the top changes before ending.
• Arguing defensively: Prevent by treating feedback as data. Ask clarifying questions and focus on user outcomes.