According to the Agile Practice Guide and literature regarding Kanban (such as the Kanban Method by David J. Anderson), transitioning from Scrum to Kanban involves a shift from time-boxed iterations to a continuous flow model.

Why Choice C is correct: In Scrum, meetings (ceremonies) are strictly scheduled according to the cadence of the Sprint (e.g., Daily Stand-ups, Sprint Planning, Sprint Reviews). In Kanban, the philosophy is to " evolve " rather than " replace, " and it prioritizes just-in-time activity. While many Kanban teams choose to keep a daily stand-up to manage flow, the formal Kanban framework allows for cadences to be " decoupled. " This means meetings like replenishment or service delivery reviews happen when required—based on the system ' s needs, such as when the " Ready " column hits a minimum threshold or when a particular work item is completed.

Analysis of other options:

B (Daily): While common, Kanban does not mandate a daily meeting in the same rigid way Scrum defines the " Daily Scrum. " Kanban focuses on the board; if the board is clear and the flow is healthy, a meeting might not be necessary every single day.

A and D (Weekly/Monthly): These are arbitrary time boxes. Kanban avoids forced cadences that do not align with the actual flow of work (the " Pull " system).

Key Differences in Cadence: In a Scrum-to-Kanban transition, the team moves away from the " end-of-sprint " rush. The PMBOK® Guide notes that Kanban focuses on managing Lead Time and Cycle Time. Therefore, the team meets to resolve bottlenecks or replenish work based on the actual state of the workflow rather than a calendar date. This flexibility allows the team to be more responsive to changes in demand.