Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
One of the most persistent misconceptions in the Agile world is the belief that Agile teams do not need managers. This idea, while popular, is rooted in a misunderstanding of what “self-managed” and “self-organized” mean. As organizations adopt Agile, they often grapple with the role of management, sometimes swinging the pendulum too far and eliminating leadership positions, expecting teams to handle everything themselves. This blog post is attempting to clarify the confusion between self-managed and self-organized teams, debunk the myth that managers are obsolete in Agile, and explore how the leadership role evolves in an Agile environment.
A key source of confusion is the difference between self-organization and self-management. Self-organizing teams decide how to accomplish their work within given constraints—they choose their methods, practices, and day-to-day task assignments. However, self-management goes a step further. A truly self-managed team is not only self-organizing but also self-funded: it has authority over budget, staffing, and strategic decisions, essentially functioning as a mini company within the organization. Most Agile teams are not self-managed in this sense; they still rely on external leadership for resources, direction, and alignment.
The notion that Agile does away with management stems from a literal interpretation of the Agile Manifesto for Software Development, which values “individuals and interactions over processes and tools.” However, nowhere does Agile suggest the removal of leadership. Instead, Agile advocates for a shift in leadership style—from command-and-control to servant leadership. When organizations eliminate managers without redefining their roles, teams often struggle with unresolved conflicts, unclear priorities, and a lack of support.
In your organization, how has the role of managers changed since adopting Agile practices?
Where do you see confusion between self-organization and self-management within your teams?
What support do your Agile teams need from leadership to reach their full potential?
Blog post: Do Agile Teams Really Not Need Managers?
Luis BrancoCEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, LdªCarcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal
I have seen the manager’s role change most meaningfully when autonomy is treated as an organizational design question rather than simply a leadership style.
Teams may be encouraged to self-organize, but their real autonomy still depends on decision rights, access to context, resource boundaries, escalation paths and the consequences attached to their decisions.
In that environment, the manager’s role is not simply to step back or become a coach. It is increasingly to design and protect the conditions under which teams can make good decisions without repeatedly asking for permission or discovering too late that their authority was only informal.
For me, the confusion begins when organizations remove managerial intervention without redesigning the decision system around the team.
Perhaps the support Agile teams need most from leadership is not less management, but clearer context, explicit boundaries and governance that makes responsible autonomy actually possible. Saving Changes...
This distinction between self-organizing and self-managed is critical.
The Shift in Role: Managers haven't become obsolete; their job has shifted from directing tasks to optimizing the environment. Instead of managing the work, they manage the ecosystem so the team can work without friction.
The Confusion: The biggest pitfall is expecting a team to be "self-managed" (handling budgets, strategic alignment, and hiring) when they are actually only equipped to be "self-organizing" (choosing how to execute the work). Without a manager to bridge that gap, teams burn out trying to run a business instead of delivering value.
What Teams Need: True enablement, not hands-off abandonment. Teams need managers who act as strategic buffers—removing systemic roadblocks, securing funding, and aligning the team's output with executive vision.
Agile doesn't kill management; it raises the bar for what good leadership looks face-to-face. Great read!
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Jul 14, 2026 10:58 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
The shift in managerial roles is something that very few Agile Coaches tell senior management. Agile needs a new organisational culture, based on trust and delegation, and that's not what most rigid organisations are paying for.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Luis, unfortunately, I've seen many places where the confusion starts with an 'Agile' Coach, in most cases, a glorified trainer who never delivered a product or managed a team. When a group/team of developers assumes that they don't need managers because they are now a Scrum Team, they will learn fast that money doesn't grow on trees :). Part of my mentoring Scrum Masters is to ask them to come to the project Sponsor to inform them that we can't meet a milestone. The Sponsor is usually 2-3 levels above the Scrum Master in the organisation hierarchy. For a PM, it is not unusual to deliver bad news to the C-level, but for a (lead) developer, it is. That's how people learn fast the difference between self-organised and self-managed :) Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Jul 14, 2026 12:36 AM
Replying to Sayed Zaidi Kashif Mekhdi
...
This distinction between self-organizing and self-managed is critical.
The Shift in Role: Managers haven't become obsolete; their job has shifted from directing tasks to optimizing the environment. Instead of managing the work, they manage the ecosystem so the team can work without friction.
The Confusion: The biggest pitfall is expecting a team to be "self-managed" (handling budgets, strategic alignment, and hiring) when they are actually only equipped to be "self-organizing" (choosing how to execute the work). Without a manager to bridge that gap, teams burn out trying to run a business instead of delivering value.
What Teams Need: True enablement, not hands-off abandonment. Teams need managers who act as strategic buffers—removing systemic roadblocks, securing funding, and aligning the team's output with executive vision.
Agile doesn't kill management; it raises the bar for what good leadership looks face-to-face. Great read!
The shift in managerial roles is something that very few Agile Coaches tell senior management. Agile needs a new organisational culture, based on trust and delegation, and that's not what most rigid organisations are paying for. Saving Changes...
Robert SnyderFounder & President| Innovation Elegance, LLCChicago, Il, United States
I think there is a related, worthwhile question about agile ... pertaining to culture.
If agile teams are fast, frequent (go-live events), self-funded, servant leadership, autonomous, emphasizing trust, and emphasizing delegation …
… are all other teams slow, non-frequent (go-live events), other-funded, command-and-control, integrated (non-autonomous), shrugging at trust, and shrugging at delegation?
What does “agile” claim that is truly mutually exclusive from “non-agile” work?
In 2001, agile pertained to working software. Working software was the primary measure of progress. In 2026, what is agile’s scope? What is “just barely outside” agile’s scope, relegated to non-agile thought leadership?
Has “agile” solved trust and trustworthiness? Saving Changes...
Managers shifted from assigning tasks to removing blockers and protecting focus, less "what to do," more "what's in your way." Confusion arises when people treat "self-organizing" (choosing how to work) as if it meant "self-managed" (owning budget and priorities); teams still need leadership for the latter.
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Sep 03, 2026 11:45 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
One bad behaviour that I've encountered is Scrum Masters behaving more dictatorial than a command-and-control project manager. A PM is responsible for delivery and must choose whatever style works, but a SM has only one responsibility: the Scrum framework.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Jul 15, 2026 7:36 AM
Replying to Syed Ashir Riaz
...
Managers shifted from assigning tasks to removing blockers and protecting focus, less "what to do," more "what's in your way." Confusion arises when people treat "self-organizing" (choosing how to work) as if it meant "self-managed" (owning budget and priorities); teams still need leadership for the latter.
One bad behaviour that I've encountered is Scrum Masters behaving more dictatorial than a command-and-control project manager. A PM is responsible for delivery and must choose whatever style works, but a SM has only one responsibility: the Scrum framework. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
