The Product Manager’s Role in PI Planning

This is a guide to understand the Product Manager’s role in PI Planning. As such, the article will describe what a Product Manager must do during PI planning. Read our earlier article about PI planning preparation to understand how to get ready for the event PI Planning is often described as the heartbeat of the Agile Release Train.  This event is more than a mere planning event. This is the event where the strategy gets validated against the practicalities of delivering realities.

 Product Managers Role in PI planning : The Value Gurdian

Product Managers act as a keeper of Value for the Agile Release Train- (ART). During the PI planning, a PM helps stakeholders and the teams to align, and decide what matters most, and how we will deliver it. This article will not go in depth about the PI Planning structure. This article in scaled agile website describes PI planning structure well. Here, I will talk about how a PM shows up—before and during the event—to make it actually work. Before PI Planning: What a PM must align before Day 1 Most of your impact as a PM happens before PI Planning starts. If you walk into Day 1 hoping alignment will happen in the room, you’re already late. Here I will share a few things you need to get in place early. First, stakeholder alignment. Business, Architecture, and Engineering should not be debating fundamental priorities during PI Planning. You don’t need perfect agreement—but you need enough clarity to move forward towards the intended objective Second, priority clarity. Your “Top 10” features shouldn’t be a vague wishlist. They should reflect real decisions—what makes it in, what doesn’t, and why. When you decide priorities, it is tempting to focus all your energies on the low-hanging fruit. Do not fall for the trap. Make sure to balance new features with Architecture runway. Third, dependencies. If there are known cross-team dependencies, start conversations early. Don’t wait for teams to discover them during breakouts. And finally, trade-offs. Go in with a point of view. If capacity doesn’t allow everything—and it won’t—what gives? Preparation is less about documents and more about decisions.

The Product Managers Core Role  During PI Planning

Once PI Planning starts, your role becomes very visible. At a high level, you need to

• Set the direction through the vision
• Balance priorities against capacity
• Negotiate scope when capacity, skill or dependency issues arise
• Work with stakeholders to get the Business Value (BV) numbers established
• Participating in risk management (ROAM)

What you’re NOT  responsible for is micromanaging team plans. A common mistake is trying to be everywhere and solve everything. That usually creates more noise than clarity. Your role is to anchor the conversation around value—and step in only when alignment is at risk.

Presenting the Vision: What You Must Bring to the Table

The vision presentation at the start of PI planning sets the tone for everything that follows. And it’s easy to get this wrong. Reading through slides won’t cut it. Teams need to understand:

• What are we trying to achieve this PI?
• Why does it matter?
• What are the few things we really care about?

The “Top 10 Features” matter—but not as a list. As a clear signal of priority. If everything sounds equally important, teams will struggle to make decisions later. Also, give guardrails:

• What does success look like?
• Are there constraints teams should be aware of?

  A good vision presentation helps the team with clarity about what they should focus on.

Supporting Teams During Breakouts

Breakouts are where the real planning happens. I have seen that, during the breakouts, many PMs either overstep or disappear completely. Both do not help. The balance is important. You’re there to:

• Explain focus and priority when teams are not clear
• Help negotiate scope as an when needed – This can be because
• Facilitate alignment across Product Owners

  You’re not there to dictate how teams should plan their work.

Participate in Draft Plan Reviews

Draft plan reviews are where the ART leadership (PM /RTE and system architect) first sit down with the teams to discuss the plan. This is not just a status update—it’s your chance to catch issues early. Look at:

• Team-level PI Objectives: Are the team-level PI objectives outcome-focused, or have the team just listed down the sequence of stories?
• Commitment levels: What’s committed vs uncommitted—and why? Have the teams created their commitment only on capacity basis or have they considered uncertainties like skill issues/technical feasibility and dependencies
• Capacity alignment: Are teams overloading themselves? Have they considered day to day overheads

Also, pay attention to dependencies. The ART planning board is your friend here. It helps you see where things might break before they actually do. It is often helpful to start the rough ART planning board in this segment. Don’t just listen to what teams present—look for what’s missing.

 Management Review & Problem Solving: Where PMs Shine

This is usually the most intense part of PI Planning. Plans don’t fit. They don’t look like what we had hoped for. Capacity is exceeded. Dependencies create friction. This is where a skilled and prepared PM makes a difference A good Product manager should come prepared with:

• Trade-off options, not just problems – Talk about what changes and trade offs can help us go closer to our earlier ambitions – be ready with a view on what can move out if something else must come in
• Ideas on how uncommitted work could become committed – what help you need?
• Stay firm on what can not really be done – do not set unrealistic expectations. It is critical to balance Business Urgency with team capacity and technical feasibility
• Champion the Architecture runway – do not lose focus on maintaining a balance with immediate feature value and being ready for what comes next

Assigning Business Value (BV): More Than a Number

Assigning Business Value often becomes a mechanical exercise. It shouldn’t be. This is where you help stakeholders understand what really matters. Once stakeholders really “see” what your teams will be doing – alignment is easy to follow A few things to keep in mind:

• Not everything can be “high value” – encourage stakeholders to show what matters most to them
• Explain Architectural runway  –  help the stakeholders truly sppericiate the impact they will have if teams ignore the runway completely in favor of only immediate value
• Explain Uncommitted objectives are not low priority and team will not be ignoring those—The uncommitted status reflects uncertainty

Use this moment to create shared understanding, not just assign numbers.

Common Pitfalls in PI planning

Some patterns show up very often. Good PMs take care to avoid these. Overcommitment is the big one. Planning at 100% capacity seems efficient—but it rarely works in reality. Plan adequate but transparent buffers to allow for unexpected Another anti-pattern of is to actually plan feature delivery work in the IP iteration – This will quickly kill both innovation and your planning for the next PI Then there’s the silent PM. Being unavailable or disengaged during PI Planning creates confusion quickly. Another one is ignoring architectural runway. It’s easy to deprioritize it in favor of visible features—but the cost shows up later. And finally, over-controlling. Trying to drive every decision slows teams down and reduces ownership. The goal is not control—it’s clarity.

How to be an effective PM during PI planning

Being effective during PI Planning isn’t just about what you know—it’s about how you interact during PI planning First, presence. You don’t need to be everywhere—but you do need to be accessible. Especially in high-risk discussions. Second, knowing when to step in. — Step in when teams are not clear about priorities. If they’re debating execution details—step back Third, reading the room. — Confusion, hesitation, repeated questions—these are signals that something isn’t clear. Fourth bring clarity to management and stakeholders – help them understand trade-offs —Discuss what can and can not be done — explain the need for innovation and architecture  runway Finally comes decision-making. — you will be asked to make a lot of decisions. You won’t have complete information. That’s normal. Some factors to consider are Value , risk , capacity and technical feasibility. Also consider face trade-offs: Short-term delivery vs long-term architecture or Business pressure vs technical reality Sometimes you push. Sometimes you adapt.

Conclusion: Bring enough clarity start execution

At the end of PI Planning, you’ll have a plan. But more importantly, you’ll have a level of alignment. The confidence vote is not about perfection. It’s about whether teams believe in what they’ve planned. Your role doesn’t end here. The plan needs to translate into a living backlog. Priorities need to hold—or be consciously adjusted. PI Planning is not about getting everything right upfront. It’s about creating enough clarity and alignment so that when things change—and they will—teams know how to respond. That’s what good product leadership looks like.  

The post The Product Manager’s Role in PI Planning appeared first on World Of Agile.

Being a Scrum Master for Multiple Teams: Why It Happens, What It Breaks, and How to Make It Work

Being a Scrum Master for Multiple Teams – Is it possible? Can it work? and rather “How to make it work?” – In almost every organization I’ve worked with, this question eventually comes up:

“Can one Scrum Master handle multiple teams?” And more often than not—the answer is already assumed to be yes.

Not because it’s ideal. But because it feels practical… It seems more efficient

Let’s be clear about why this model exists before we jump into whether it works.

Why Organizations Assign One Scrum Master to Multiple Teams

In my experience across large agile transformations, this decision usually comes from one (or more) of these reasons:

1. Budget Constraints

Agile transformations are often expected to be “lean.”

So instead of hiring one  Scrum Master per team, Organizations go for one Scrum Master for 2–3 teams. On paper, it looks efficient.

2. Misunderstanding the Scrum Master Role

This is still very common. Often leadership sees the Scrum Master as:

• A meeting facilitator
• A Jira admin
• A status tracker

Then naturally, they ask – “Why can’t one person handle multiple teams?”

3. “Senior = Can Handle More”

I’ve seen this especially with Senior Scrum Masters or Experienced Developers stepping into SM roles. The logic then becomes: “They’re experienced, so they should handle more teams.”

Experience does increase effectiveness. But it doesn’t multiply time or presence.

4. Mature Teams (At Least Perception of It)

Sometimes the assumption is: “These teams are “doing” Agile for long time now. They don’t need much support.” Sometimes this is true. But many times it’s just… optimistic.

When  Organizations Assign One Scrum Master to Multiple Teams

 – What Actually Happens?

Let me share something I’ve seen repeatedly. I once worked with an organization where one Scrum Master supported three teams.

• Team A was high-performing
• Team B was struggling with dependencies
• Team C was newly formed

Guess where most of the Scrum Master’s time went?

Team C (firefighting)
Then Team B (escalations)

And Team A? -They slowly drifted. Retrospectives became routine … Improvement slowed down ….Small issues went unnoticed

Nothing broke immediately. But growth stalled.

That’s the subtle risk in this model.

Challenges You Should Expect

Despite of all this, it is inevitable that you will have to look after more than one team at a time – Below I will give some challenges you should expect in the situation

1. Context Switching Is Real

Every team has:

• Different stakeholders and Energy
• Different maturity
• Different challenges (geographical distribution / domain complexities / cultural differences /product lifecycle stage.. etc)

Switching between them isn’t just logistical—it is a definite mental stress. And this stress builds up. Slowly but surely.

2. You May Move from Deep Impact to Surface Coverage

When you work with many teams, you run the risk of spreading yourself too thin. Then, instead of:

• Coaching behaviors
• Enabling ownership
• Driving systemic improvements

You may end up:

• Just Attending Events – and this is when the Scrum Events start to turn into mere “ceremonies”
• Focusing on the obvious, on the surface “blockers” – you now lack bandwidth to go deeper to seek and address the true impediments. Read this article to understand how (and more importantly – “why” to differentiate between blocker and impediment. 

3. Your Availability Becomes a Bottleneck

Teams don’t need you all the time. But when they do need you—it’s usually urgent. With multiple teams, you’re often:

• In another meeting
• Context-switching
• Or already overloaded

Slowly the teams start to normalize you being less available to them… and that often leads ti them accepting the waiting game.

4. Impediments Take Longer to Resolve

The real work of a Scrum Master is not in meetings or Scrum Events. It’s in:

• Following through
• Influencing stakeholders
• Removing systemic blockers

And that work suffers when attention is split.

5. Energy Drain (The Silent One)

When you are working as a Scrum master for more than one team, you are running from one meeting to other …

• Daily Scrum for Team  A
• Refinement sessions for Team B
• Reviews for Team C
• Retrospectives  for Team A

The cycle goes on and on without a break. This is where even experienced Scrum Masters start feeling stretched.

What Helps When One Scrum Master Is Supporting Multiple Teams

Scrum Guide says Scrum Master is accountable for helping the Scrum Team become more effective. When you work with multiple teams as a Scrum Master, that expectations will still remain. Below I have given some tips that help

1  Shared Product Context

If there’s one factor that significantly improves the chances of success in a multi-team setup, it’s this:  The teams are working on the same or closely related products. I’ve seen this make a huge difference.

When teams are aligned around:

• The same product
• A shared customer journey
• Interconnected features

The Scrum Master gains leverage:

• Better context retention (less mental switching)
• Stronger stakeholder alignment
• Easier dependency management
• More meaningful cross-team coaching

I once worked with three teams building different modules of the same platform.

Instead of treating them as separate units, we:

• Ran joint backlog refinement for shared features
• Aligned retrospectives occasionally to spot system-level issues
• Visualized dependencies across both teams

The result?

Less duplication
Faster decision-making
And significantly smoother flow

Compare that to supporting unrelated teams (say, one in payments and another in HR systems)—the cognitive load and disconnect are much higher.

So if organizations must assign one Scrum Master to multiple teams, product alignment is a powerful enabler.

2. Shift from “Team Scrum Master” to “System Enabler”

If you try to give equal time to all teams—you’ll struggle. Instead:

• Look for patterns across teams
• Solve problems at the system level
• Reduce recurring issues

This is where Kanban thinking (flow, bottlenecks) becomes incredibly valuable.

3. Be Intentional About Where You Go Deep

Not all teams need the same level of attention.

I usually ask:

• Which team is at risk?
• Which team can self-sustain?
• Where will my effort create the most impact?

Then I adjust accordingly.

4. Build Capability Inside the Team

One of the biggest shifts:

Stop being the center of everything.

Instead:

• Encourage team members to facilitate
• Build ownership of Scrum Events
• Develop internal champions

If everything depends on you—you won’t scale. Remember, as a Scrum Master you are accountable from Scrum Team effectiveness – and you are NOT accountable to do everything yourself

5. Make Retrospectives Non-Negotiable

If there’s one place to invest your energies deeply—it’s for Sprint Retrospectives

Even with multiple teams:

• Make every effort to keep retrospectives meaningful
• Focus on real actionable improvement items
• Follow through on actions

This is where the teams start being more effective.

6. Use Visualization to Your Advantage

Across teams:

• Visualize bottlenecks
• Highlight delays
• Track dependencies

When leaders see the system, conversations change. Teams delivering value is more important  than teams just “doing work”

7. Protect  Your Own Energy and bandwodth Ruthlessly

This is rarely talked about—but critical.

• Avoid stacking heavy sessions back-to-back – if you are not at your best, that will impact the value you bring to the table.
• Create thinking space (not just meeting space)  – create some bandwidth for your self to  just think
• Protect time for actual coaching work

You’re not effective when you’re exhausted.

Final Thoughts On Being a Scrum Master for Multiple Teams….

Being a Scrum Master for multiple teams isn’t about doing more.

It’s about:

• Establishing Synergy
• Empowering Teams
• Enabling systems
• And using context (especially shared product context) to your advantage

When done thoughtfully, this model can actually elevate the Scrum Master role from team facilitator to organizational change agent.

The post Being a Scrum Master for Multiple Teams appeared first on World Of Agile.

Does Agile Need Project Managers? A Reality Check

Introduction: Agile and Project Managers

“Agile doesn’t need Project Managers.” Or “Project Managers are getting obsolete”

I often hear this statement. People often say this with conviction, sometimes with relief, and occasionally with confusion.

Over the last decade or so frameworks like Scrum and Kanban have become more famous. And that brought a shift away from traditional roles. Scrum, in particular, explicitly defines only three accountabilities: Product Owner, Scrum Master, and Developers. Scrum Guide does NOT mention a project manager at all.

And just like that, many organizations concluded: the Project Manager role is obsolete. We do not need Project Managers any longer…..

But is that the right conclusion ? — Or have we misunderstood what Agile is actually trying to change?

I do not plan to defend job titles in this article. Instead, I want to discuss and examine the ground reality. I want to talk about what actually happens in Agile projects beyond theory, certifications, and frameworks.

Where Did This Question Come From?

To understand the confusion, we need to go back to traditional project management.

In a traditional setup, the Project Manager was the central authority. This person was responsible to plan, track, report, manage the risk management, communicate with team and stakeholder and above all ensure value delivery.

With so much to do, project managers often became a bottle neck.

Agile challenged this model.

Instead of centralized control, Agile emphasized:

• Self-managed teams
• Collaboration over hierarchy
• Adaptability over rigid planning

In doing so, Agile (more specifically Scrum) didn’t explicitly include the Project Manager role.

Many interpreted  this as “no need for project managers.”

That’s a dangerous assumption and a myth!

While Agile removed the role as a command-and-control authority, it did not eliminate the responsibilities that ensure delivery.

What Agile Frameworks Actually do Say about Project Management

Now Let’s separate the myth from reality.

We saw that Scrum did not specifically ask for Project Managers

What Does Scrum Say about Project Managers?

Scrum defines accountabilities clearly—and Project Manager isn’t one of them. But Scrum operates at the team level. It assumes a relatively contained environment where a single team can deliver value incrementally.

It does not address:

• Cross-team dependencies
• Complex stakeholder landscapes
• Organizational constraints

Kanban and the Project Manager
Kanban goes even further. It doesn’t mandate specific roles at all. Kanban focuses on evolutionary change, improving  the flow via work visualisation, and limiting work in progress.

But again, it assumes a system where flow can be managed effectively. Someone still needs to ensure alignment, remove bottlenecks, and manage expectations. These days, roles emerge for flow management in kanban. Some common  roles are  the Service Delivery Manager (SDM)(who manages workflow and removes bottlenecks – similar to a Scrum Master), and the Service Request Manager (SRM) (who manages the backlog and prioritizes customer requests – like a Product Owner)

SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework) and the Project Manager

SAFe also does not have a designated role called a Project manager. However,  SAFe does include roles like  the Release Train Engineer, the  Product Manager, and the System Architect.

Question is Why?

Because at scale, coordination and alignment is critical. Dependencies multiply. Stakeholders increase. Complexity grows.

And suddenly, the need for overarching thinking becomes undeniable.

The Reality of Agile Projects on the Ground

In real organizations, Agile projects today rarely operate in isolation. They involve:

• Multiple teams working on shared outcomes
• Dependencies across systems and functions
• Stakeholders with competing priorities
• Pressure to deliver faster, with quality

Now ask yourself:

• Who ensures that all of this comes together?
• Who aligns teams when priorities conflict?
• Who manages risks that span across teams?
• Who communicates with stakeholders beyond the team level?
• Who takes accountability for multi team integrated delivery outcomes?

Self-organizing teams are powerful—but they are not designed to solve organizational complexity on their own.

 So Who Actually Does this Work?

Even in Agile environments, the following responsibilities don’t disappear:

• Stakeholder Management – Aligning expectations, managing communication
• Dependency Management – Coordinating across teams and systems
• Risk Management – Identifying and mitigating delivery risks
• Planning at Scale – Beyond sprint-level planning
• Delivery Accountability – Ensuring outcomes, not just outputs

What happens on ground? These responsibilities are often:

• Distributed
• Unclear
• Or silently pushed onto Scrum Masters, Product Owners, or senior team members

This creates confusion—and sometimes, burnout. Read this article to understand the Scrum Accountabilities and what happens when we ask people to wear multiple hats  

The Emergence of the Agile Project Manager

In many organizations, something interesting happens. The role doesn’t disappear—it evolves. The title may not be “Project Manager” anymore. Instead, the new title can be:

• Delivery Manager
• Program Manager
• Agile Project Manager
• Release Train Engineer

But the essence remains the same:
Someone is responsible to connect the dots.

When you assume the title of an Agile e Project Manager, you do not assume a command-and-control authority.

Instead, you become a

• A Facilitator of alignment
• A Enabler of flow
• A Manager of complexity

and

• An Influencer without formal authority

When Agile Projects Fail Without Project Management

Let’s be honest—many Agile transformations struggle.

Not because Agile doesn’t work, but because critical responsibilities are ignored.

Common patterns include:

• Teams delivering increments that don’t align with business outcomes
• Dependencies causing delays and frustration
• Stakeholders feeling disconnected and dissatisfied
• Lack of clear ownership for delivery risks

In such cases, Agile doesn’t feel empowering—it feels chaotic.

And often, the missing piece is not process—it’s project-level thinking and coordination.

What Makes an Agile Project Manager Different

If Agile still needs project management, then what changes?

Everything.

The Agile Project Manager is not:

• A task assigner
• A status tracker
• A gatekeeper

Instead, they:

• Enable flow, not control work
• Facilitate decisions, not impose them
• Influence stakeholders, not manage them through authority
• Focus on outcomes, not just timelines

It’s a shift from control to alignment and orchestration.

Snehamayee’s Thoughts

So do you need an Agile Project Manager? The answer is: it depends.

You may not need a dedicated Project Manager when:

• You have a single, small, co-located team
• Dependencies are minimal
• Stakeholders are closely aligned

But as complexity increases—

• Multiple teams
• Distributed environments
• High uncertainty
• Organizational constraints

—project-level coordination becomes essential.

Call it what you want, but the capability must exist.

The Bigger Problem: We’re Asking the Wrong Question

“Do Agile projects need Project Managers?” is the wrong question.

The better question is:

Do Agile projects need strong project management capabilities?

The answer is clearly yes.

Organizations don’t fail because they have Project Managers.
They fail because they lack clarity on how the role should evolve in Agile.

Conclusion: A Project Manager for an Agile Project is still relevant – You just have to align the work for Agile Realities

Agile didn’t eliminate the need for project management.

It redefined it.

The role is no longer about control—it’s about enabling alignment, managing complexity, and ensuring delivery in dynamic environments.

Whether you call it a Project Manager, Delivery Manager, or something else doesn’t matter.

What matters is this:

If no one is taking ownership of project-level responsibilities, your Agile setup is incomplete.

Reflection for you:
In your Agile projects today—who is actually handling project-level responsibilities?

The post Does Agile Need Project Managers? appeared first on World Of Agile.