Agile methodologies, particularly Scrum, have transformed modern project management, emphasizing collaboration, adaptability, and efficiency. At the core of these frameworks are the roles of Product Manager (PM) and Scrum Master (SM), which are crucial to aligning a product’s strategic vision with its operational execution. However, the dynamic relationship between these roles often presents challenges, including potential conflicts due to differing priorities. Trust serves as the critical element that mitigates these challenges, fostering collaboration and ensuring that agile teams perform at their best. Trust is not merely a desirable attribute but a crucial element of agile team success.
It is not uncommon for organizations to experience difficulties in achieving a balance between the strategic focus of Project Managers (PMs) and the facilitation role of Scrum Masters (SMs). The success of Agile methodologies is contingent upon the establishment of trust-driven relationships that facilitate transparency, communication, and role clarity. The agile approaches, originally designed to manage the uncertainty of complex environments, now respond to effectiveness and efficiency (Magistretti and Trabucchi 2024, 24).
The definition of trust proposed is the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party (Mayer, Davis and Schoorman 1995, 712). This vulnerability is of particular consequence in agile teams, where iterative cycles of planning, execution, and feedback necessitate transparency, open communication, and mutual respect. The Product Manager is responsible for defining the product vision and prioritizing the backlog with the objective of delivering stakeholder value, while the Scrum Master ensures the team adheres to agile principles and facilitates collaboration. Trust serves as the connective tissue that enables these roles to align their efforts and overcome challenges.
Team psychological safety is defined as a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking. This confidence stems from mutual respect and trust among team members (Edmondson 1999, 354). This safety encourages open discussions, the sharing of innovative ideas, and the resolution of conflicts—elements essential for agile success. For example, when a PM and SM operate in a trust-based relationship, they can collaboratively navigate competing priorities, such as balancing rapid delivery with sustainable team practices, ensuring a balance between strategic goals and team well-being.
The absence of trust can result in communication breakdowns, unresolved conflicts, and misaligned goals, which in turn affect team performance and product quality. Conversely, trust enhances collaboration, fosters alignment, and creates an environment conducive to the success of both roles. By prioritizing trust-building initiatives, such as transparent communication and regular retrospectives, organizations can establish a culture that supports agile methodologies. Trust is the foundation for effective collaboration between Product Managers and Scrum Masters.
Understanding Trust in Agile Teams
Trust is a fundamental element in the success of agile teams, providing the foundation for collaboration, transparency, and team cohesion. In agile teams, trust enables open communication, helps alignment, and cultivates a culture where members can engage in interpersonal risk-taking without concern for negative consequences.
Ability, benevolence, and integrity are important to trust, and each may vary independently of the others (Mayer, Davis and Schoorman 1995, 720). The following sections will elaborate on these terms—ability, benevolence, and integrity—accompanied by illustrative examples.
- Ability is that group of skills, competencies, and characteristics that enable a party to have influence within some specific domain (Mayer, Davis and Schoorman 1995, 717). For example, a software engineer with advanced abilities in the development and resolution of technical issues may be relied upon for tasks such as software creation. However, they may lack the interpersonal abilities necessary to oversee client relationships, which could limit their suitability for roles such as leading a sales pitch or negotiating with customers.
- Benevolence is the extent to which a trustee is believed to want to do good to the trustor, aside from an egocentric profit motive (Mayer, Davis and Schoorman 1995, 718). To illustrate, in a technology-focused organization, a senior software engineer (trustee) may extend their workday to assist a junior developer (trustor) in resolving a complex challenge, even though such assistance falls outside the scope of their designated responsibilities and is not accompanied by any additional compensation. This behavior can be regarded as benevolent, as it reflects a genuine inclination on the part of the senior engineer to facilitate the junior developer’s advancement and success, prioritizing their well-being and growth over personal gain.
- The relationship between integrity and trust involves the trustor’s perception that the trustee adheres to a set of principles that the trustor finds acceptable (Mayer, Davis and Schoorman 1995, 719). To illustrate, a software engineer (trustee) is tasked with resolving a critical bug in the company’s flagship product. Rather than implementing a hastily devised, albeit unstable, solution to meet a deadline, they opt for a methodology that aligns with the company’s principles of delivering high-quality, reliable code, even though it necessitates a longer timeframe. This decision exemplifies integrity, as the engineer adheres to a set of professional values that prioritize the long-term trust and satisfaction of the company and its users.
The ability of the Product Manager (PM) to effectively articulate the product vision and prioritize the backlog is a key factor in the development of trust within an agile team. Similarly, trust in the Scrum Master (SM) is contingent upon their competence in facilitating Scrum processes and resolving impediments to team performance. Integrity, in contrast, denotes adherence to shared principles and ethical standards. Agile team members anticipate honesty and transparency in decision-making from both PMs and SMs. Benevolence pertains to the perceived goodwill of team members, underscoring the significance of mutual respect and empathy in fostering trust.
The ability of the Product Manager (PM) to effectively articulate the product vision and prioritize the backlog is a key factor in the development of trust within an agile team. Similarly, trust in the Scrum Master (SM) is contingent upon their competence in facilitating Scrum processes and resolving impediments to team performance. Integrity, in contrast, denotes adherence to shared principles and ethical standards. Agile team members anticipate honesty and transparency in decision-making from both PMs and SMs. Benevolence pertains to the perceived goodwill of team members, underscoring the significance of mutual respect and empathy in fostering trust.
The absence of trust in agile teams can have significant consequences, including communication breakdowns, unresolved conflicts, and diminished team morale. These issues can derail sprint goals, reduce productivity, and compromise product quality. Therefore, trust is not merely a desirable attribute but a critical component of agile team success. Organizations must prioritize trust-building initiatives, recognizing that it is foundational to achieving the agility, adaptability, and innovation central to agile methodologies. Trust in agile teams is the foundation of effective collaboration, driving team performance and fostering an environment where members can thrive. Its dimensions—competence, integrity, and benevolence—provide a framework for understanding and cultivating trust in dynamic and complex team settings. When paired with psychological safety, trust creates a resilient and innovative team culture, enabling agile methodologies to deliver their full potential.
Building Trust between Product Managers and Scrum Masters
The establishment of trust is contingent upon the implementation of strategies that facilitate transparent communication, the delineation of role boundaries, and the nurturing of psychological safety.
Transparent communication serves to ensure alignment of priorities through the conduct of regular meetings. Defined role boundaries assist project managers (PMs) in concentrating on the “what” (product goals) and service managers (SMs) in focusing on the “how” (processes). The incorporation of psychological safety practices, such as the promotion of open discourse and the encouragement of diverse viewpoints, is of paramount importance.
Scrum ceremonies like daily scrums and sprint retrospectives provide structured opportunities to foster trust. Proactive conflict management prevents role overlaps from escalating.
In agile teams, the relationship between product managers (PMs) and scrum masters (SMs) is of paramount importance in aligning product vision with operational efficiency. Despite their complementary roles, the dynamic interplay between these positions can present challenges, particularly when priorities diverge or communication breaks down. The ability to navigate these complexities is contingent upon the establishment of a foundation of trust, which enables PMs and SMs to collaborate effectively and ensure the success of the team. This section explores strategies for building trust between PMs and SMs, emphasizing the importance of transparent communication, clearly defined role boundaries, and psychological safety.
Trust between PMs and SMs is built on three dimensions: competence, integrity, and benevolence (Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman 1995). Competence is a prerequisite for mutual confidence between the two roles in regard to their ability to fulfill their respective responsibilities effectively. For instance, project managers demonstrate competence by maintaining a clear and prioritized product backlog that reflects the needs of the stakeholders, whereas scrum masters exhibit competence through their facilitation of the scrum processes and removal of impediments to the team. Integrity, which reflects adherence to shared principles and ethical standards, is of equal importance. It is essential that both roles align their actions with the team’s values and demonstrate consistency in decision-making. Benevolence, or the perception of goodwill, underpins the interpersonal dynamics between PMs and SMs. This ensures that each role supports the other’s success and prioritizes the team’s well-being.
Transparent Communication
One of the most efficacious strategies for the establishment of trust is transparent communication. The Agile methodology, exemplified by the Scrum framework, places significant emphasis on the frequency and structure of interactions. These interactions may include daily stand-ups, sprint planning meetings, and retrospectives. These ceremonies provide regular opportunities for project managers (PMs) and scrum masters (SMs) to align their goals, clarify expectations, and address potential conflicts. For instance, during sprint planning, PMs can clearly articulate the rationale behind prioritizing specific backlog items, while SMs can facilitate discussions to ensure the team understands the scope and feasibility of planned tasks. This transparency reduces uncertainty and fosters mutual trust, as both roles gain confidence in each other’s intentions and capabilities. Transparency enables inspection. Inspection without transparency is misleading and wasteful (Schwaber and Sutherland 2020).
In addition to structured meetings, informal communication is a crucial element in the establishment of trust. Regular meetings between project managers and senior managers provide an opportunity for discussion of challenges, feedback, and potential misunderstandings, allowing for their resolution before they become significant issues. These conversations foster a culture of transparency and accountability, enabling both roles to work collaboratively towards shared objectives.
Defined Role Boundaries
It is of paramount importance to establish clear role boundaries in order to prevent conflicts and foster trust between project managers (PMs) and senior managers (SMs). While their responsibilities frequently overlap, maintaining clarity on their primary areas of focus helps to circumvent unnecessary tension. The primary responsibility of the product manager (PM) is to define the product vision, prioritize backlog items, and ensure that the needs of the stakeholders are met. The role of the scrum master (SM) is to facilitate the processes of the scrum framework, remove obstacles, and ensure that the team adheres to the principles of agile methodology. The Product Owner is accountable for maximizing the value of the product resulting from the work of the Scrum Team (Schwaber and Sutherland 2020). When these boundaries are respected, both roles can complement each other’s efforts rather than compete for authority.
Role clarity is of particular importance in the context of conflict resolution. To illustrate, in the event of a discrepancy between the expectations of stakeholders and the product roadmap, it falls upon the PM to facilitate alignment. Concurrently, the SM is responsible for mediating discussions and ensuring that the team’s capacity and constraints are duly considered. By adhering to these delineated roles, PMs and SMs can constructively address conflicts and maintain trust within the team.
Leveraging Scrum Ceremonies to Build Trust
The implementation of Scrum ceremonies provides a structured opportunity for the development and reinforcement of trust between project managers (PMs) and Scrum masters (SMs). The daily stand-up meeting facilitates transparency by enabling both roles to share updates, identify challenges, and align on priorities. The sprint review, in which the team demonstrates completed work, offers a forum for PMs to validate deliverables and for SMs to highlight the team’s achievements. These interactions serve to reinforce a shared sense of purpose and accountability, which are essential for the establishment of trust.
Retrospectives are an invaluable tool for fostering trust within a team, as they provide a secure environment for reflection on both successes and areas for improvement, as well as strategies for addressing challenges. By fostering open dialogue and encouraging constructive feedback, retrospectives enhance communication between project managers and stakeholders, thereby promoting continuous improvement.
Addressing Trust Challenges
Despite these strategies, trust-building is not without its challenges. Differences in communication styles, conflicting priorities, and organizational constraints can hinder trust between PMs and SMs. For example, a PM focused on meeting tight deadlines may perceive the SM’s emphasis on team well-being as a barrier, leading to friction. Addressing these challenges requires proactive conflict resolution strategies, such as mediation or third-party facilitation, to rebuild trust and realign goals.
Empirical research indicates that addressing trust challenges can yield long-term benefits. Teams that successfully rebuild trust following conflicts have been shown to demonstrate higher levels of resilience, adaptability, and performance (Edmondson, 1999). This highlights the importance of viewing trust as a dynamic and ongoing process rather than a fixed attribute.
Practical Applications and Case Insights
The practical applications of trust between product managers (PMs) and scrum masters (SMs) extend beyond theoretical models to real-world scenarios, where the alignment of these roles is a key driver of success in agile environments. Trust affects team collaboration, decision-making, and performance, enabling agile teams to adapt effectively to changing requirements. This section presents real-world examples and actionable strategies that illustrate the significance of trust in developing high-performing teams, with a particular emphasis on insights from organizations such as Google, Spotify, and Atlassian.
Real-World Example 1: Google’s “Project Aristotle”
Google’s “Project Aristotle” is a well-known study that explored the factors contributing to the formation and functioning of high-performing teams. In this project, Google attempts to redefine certain key terms, such as “team,” “effectiveness,” and “identify the dynamics of effective teams.” Trust, as a component of psychological safety, was identified as a critical determinant of team success. Teams with high levels of psychological safety demonstrated superior communication, innovation, and adaptability. The objective of Project Aristotle was to address the following question: The question was posed, “What makes a team effective at Google?” (Google 2016) In order to answer this question, an engineering team at Google implemented open feedback sessions, which were facilitated by their Scrum Master. This allowed the Product Manager to align priorities transparently. This environment enabled the team to address challenges collaboratively, thereby enhancing both efficiency and morale.
The success of psychological safety in Google’s teams demonstrates how trust between PMs and SMs fosters open communication. In this scenario, the PM trusted the SM to facilitate a safe environment for discussions, while the SM relied on the PM to provide clarity and transparency in product goals. The result was improved team performance and stakeholder satisfaction. This example highlights that trust is not merely a moral attribute but a strategic asset that directly impacts team productivity and innovation.
Real-World Example 2: Spotify’s Agile Model
Spotify’s agile model provides an additional illustrative example of the practice of trust in action. The company employs a system of teams organized into “tribes,” “squads,” and “chapters,” which ensures both autonomy and alignment (Kniberg and Ivarsson 2012). In this framework, product managers and scrum masters collaborate closely in order to achieve a balance between the product vision and the capabilities of the team. To illustrate, a product manager (PM) responsible for developing Spotify’s recommendation algorithm delegated the task of managing iterative delivery to the scrum master (SM), while simultaneously ensuring the well-being of the team. Regular retrospectives and squad check-ins enabled the resolution of conflicts, alignment on sprint goals, and maintenance of a shared focus on customer needs.
Spotify’s example illustrates the significance of mutual trust in balancing competing priorities. By placing trust in one another’s expertise, the PM and SM established an environment where the team could innovate without being overwhelmed by conflicting demands. This model also demonstrates the importance of clearly defined roles and trust-building ceremonies, such as retrospectives, in maintaining alignment across the team.
Conclusion:
It is beyond dispute that trust represents the indispensable foundation of effective collaboration between product managers (PMs) and scrum masters (SMs) within agile teams. The complex and iterative nature of agile methodologies necessitates a foundation of trust to facilitate open communication, alignment of priorities, and mutual accountability. This collaborative dynamic allows both roles to complement one another, thereby achieving a shared vision while addressing challenges efficiently. Furthermore, trust serves as a buffer against potential conflicts and also creates a psychologically safe environment where team members feel empowered to take risks, propose ideas, and navigate uncertainties. By embedding trust as a fundamental value, agile teams can unlock their full potential, thereby delivering innovation and adaptability in an ever-changing business landscape.
The dimensions of trust—competence, integrity, and benevolence—form a framework for understanding and cultivating trust within agile teams. Competence ensures that PMs and SMs have confidence in each other’s ability to fulfill their respective roles effectively. Integrity reinforces consistency and alignment with shared values, fostering transparency and ethical decision-making. Benevolence, the genuine desire to prioritize team well-being, further strengthens interpersonal relationships and collaboration. Real-world examples, such as Google’s “Project Aristotle” and Spotify’s agile model, illustrate how trust underpins high-performing teams. In these cases, trust served as a strategic asset, enabling teams to innovate, overcome obstacles, and align their efforts toward common goals.
As agile methodologies continue to evolve, it is of paramount importance to maintain trust. Organizations must prioritize trust-building initiatives, including fostering transparent communication, defining clear role boundaries, and leveraging digital tools to facilitate collaboration. Leadership also plays a pivotal role in modeling trust-oriented behaviors and integrating trust into organizational culture. Ultimately, trust is not a static attribute but rather a dynamic process that must be nurtured and sustained over time. By recognizing the central role of trust in agile practices, organizations can foster resilient and innovative teams capable of navigating complexity and achieving lasting success.
References:
- Edmondson, Amy. 1999. “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 2 350-383.
- Google, With. 2016. Understand team. https://rework.withgoogle.com/en/guides/understanding-team-effectiveness.
- Kniberg, Henrik, and Anders Ivarsson. 2012. Scaling Agile @ Spotify with Tribes, Squads, Chapters & Guilds. https://blog.crisp.se/2012/11/14/henrikkniberg/scaling-agile-at-spotify.
- Magistretti, Stefano, and Daniel Trabucchi. 2024. “Agile‑as‑a‑tool and agile‑as‑a‑culture: a comprehensive review of agile approaches adopting contingency and configuration theories.” Review of Managerial Science.
- Mayer, Roger C., James H. Davis, and F. David Schoorman. 1995. “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust.” The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 3 709-734.
- Schwaber, Ken, and Jeff Sutherland. 2020. Scrum Guides. November . https://scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2020/2020-Scrum-Guide-US.pdf.