True or False: Not addressing Technical Debt can lead to misconceptions about the product's state during Sprint Review.

Not addressing Technical Debt can indeed lead to misconceptions about the product's state during the Sprint Review. Technical Debt refers to the implied cost of additional rework or challenges that arise from choosing an easier, but less effective, solution for the sake of speed.

When a team accumulates Technical Debt, it can obscure the true quality and maintainability of the product. During a Sprint Review, stakeholders assess the product increment to determine its readiness for release or further development. If Technical Debt is not managed appropriately, the functionality presented may seem to work well on the surface, but underlying issues may persist that affect performance, reliability, or scalability. This can create a false sense of confidence about the product's state, prompting misunderstandings about its overall health and capability.

In summary, failing to address Technical Debt can lead to misleading assessments during Sprint Reviews, which is critical for making informed decisions about the product's future direction. Recognizing and managing Technical Debt ensures clarity and transparency in the product's development, which is essential for effective collaboration with stakeholders and maintaining trust in the Scrum process.