Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
The promise of Agile to deliver more, faster, and with fewer resources is a relentless pressure for Agile teams. High-performing teams are often celebrated for their speed and output, yet a crucial question persists: can such intensity be sustained over the long term without negative consequences? The answer, rooted in both research and ethical practice, is clear: chronic overwork is a recipe for diminishing returns, declining well-being, and, ultimately, burnout. This blog post explores the concept of sustainable pace, the perils of normalizing burnout, and recommends actionable strategies for leaders and teams to ensure long-term health and productivity.
The Illusion of Short-Term Gains
Many organizations are seduced by the apparent productivity spikes that come with pushing teams harder and longer. Intense delivery sprints may yield impressive short-term results, but sustainable pace isn’t about working less; it’s about working smarter and longer, over the life of a project. Research and practice consistently show that chronic overwork leads to more defects, reduced creativity, and lower retention, undermining the very performance organizations seek to achieve.
Distinguishing a Temporary Push from a Harmful Norm
A common question among practitioners is: how do we recognize when a healthy, time-boxed push has become the new normal? The warning signs are well-documented:
·Increasing defects and rework
·Rising absenteeism and sick leave
·Growing resentment and disengagement
·Reduced willingness to learn or innovate
These symptoms are not merely individual failings; they are signals of a system under strain. Burnout is a system problem, not an individual resilience problem.
The Ethics of Planning and Leading
Ethics in project management is not just a matter of compliance; it’s about safeguarding the long-term interests of both people and projects. Unethical planning, setting targets that ignore capacity and sustainability, is both shortsighted and damaging. The professional duty of a project manager is to plan realistically, communicate openly, and avoid reinforcing a culture where burnout is equated with dedication.
Blog post: Sustainable Pace and Burnout Prevention: Building High-Performing Teams for the Long Haul
Robert SnyderFounder & President| Innovation Elegance, LLCChicago, Il, United States
Ethics and trustworthiness are not synonymous, but for this thread, I think I can use them interchangeably.
The world has tried to push a LOT under the umbrella of "agile," but it's possible that agile left "ethics" out in the rain.
When it comes to methodology and SOPs, for many of us, the core of these is software. We have software methodologies. We use phrases like data-driven, tech startup, and AI native. We don't direct methodology at people, their ethic, or their trustworthiness.
To date, there is no mainstream "Methodical Trustworthiness" or "Methodically Ethical."
The only idiotproof / narcissist-proof methodology I know of is not yet mainstream. It's on the sidelines until VUCA overstays its welcome.
For the near future ...
Teams are systemically tolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior. Someday, teams might like the idea of being systematically intolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior.
...
2 replies by Stelian ROMAN
Jul 26, 2026 9:44 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
Robert Snyder my post is about metrics and their effectiveness, not trustworthiness. I disagree with your statement that "there is no mainstream <Methodical Trustworthiness> or <Methodically Ethical>. Most professional organisations (Medical, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering), Agile excepted, have a Code of Ethics. For project management, I strongly recommend PMI's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.
Sep 01, 2026 7:28 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
"Agile left ethics.... " is not true. Most Agile values require high ethical standards. Transparency and delegation of authority can't be done without respect, responsibility, honesty, and fairness.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Jul 22, 2026 11:29 PM
Replying to Robert Snyder
...
Ethics and trustworthiness are not synonymous, but for this thread, I think I can use them interchangeably.
The world has tried to push a LOT under the umbrella of "agile," but it's possible that agile left "ethics" out in the rain.
When it comes to methodology and SOPs, for many of us, the core of these is software. We have software methodologies. We use phrases like data-driven, tech startup, and AI native. We don't direct methodology at people, their ethic, or their trustworthiness.
To date, there is no mainstream "Methodical Trustworthiness" or "Methodically Ethical."
The only idiotproof / narcissist-proof methodology I know of is not yet mainstream. It's on the sidelines until VUCA overstays its welcome.
For the near future ...
Teams are systemically tolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior. Someday, teams might like the idea of being systematically intolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior.
Robert Snyder my post is about metrics and their effectiveness, not trustworthiness. I disagree with your statement that "there is no mainstream <Methodical Trustworthiness> or <Methodically Ethical>. Most professional organisations (Medical, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering), Agile excepted, have a Code of Ethics. For project management, I strongly recommend PMI's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Saving Changes...
Robert SnyderFounder & President| Innovation Elegance, LLCChicago, Il, United States
It's a good disagreement. 😊
If project success rates are satisfactory, we succeeded in Methodical Trustworthiness.
When there are numerous events, posts, and articles about trustworthiness, we do not have Methodical Trustworthiness. Many people are starving for ethics and trust.
Codes of Ethics have not reached their aspirations or potential. They have not solved trust problems. Any metrics out there have not yet been effective. If convenient, I will explore the existing metrics and research how successful any of us are in managing to them or sustaining them.
Methodical Trustworthiness = Competence AND Honesty AND Dependability AND Benevolence.
Untrustworthiness = Incompetence OR Dishonesty OR Low Dependability OR Malevolence.
We have not achieved Methodical Trustworthiness.
Any trustworthiness methodology is not yet adopted.
There is a lot of saturation out there, which is not a sustainable pace.
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Sep 01, 2026 7:30 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
Competency may or may not be the result of ethical values. The way we use our competency and recognise when we don't have the skills or experience determines how ethically we behave.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Jul 22, 2026 11:29 PM
Replying to Robert Snyder
...
Ethics and trustworthiness are not synonymous, but for this thread, I think I can use them interchangeably.
The world has tried to push a LOT under the umbrella of "agile," but it's possible that agile left "ethics" out in the rain.
When it comes to methodology and SOPs, for many of us, the core of these is software. We have software methodologies. We use phrases like data-driven, tech startup, and AI native. We don't direct methodology at people, their ethic, or their trustworthiness.
To date, there is no mainstream "Methodical Trustworthiness" or "Methodically Ethical."
The only idiotproof / narcissist-proof methodology I know of is not yet mainstream. It's on the sidelines until VUCA overstays its welcome.
For the near future ...
Teams are systemically tolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior. Someday, teams might like the idea of being systematically intolerant of untrustworthiness and unethical behavior.
"Agile left ethics.... " is not true. Most Agile values require high ethical standards. Transparency and delegation of authority can't be done without respect, responsibility, honesty, and fairness. Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Jul 26, 2026 9:54 PM
Replying to Robert Snyder
...
It's a good disagreement. 😊
If project success rates are satisfactory, we succeeded in Methodical Trustworthiness.
When there are numerous events, posts, and articles about trustworthiness, we do not have Methodical Trustworthiness. Many people are starving for ethics and trust.
Codes of Ethics have not reached their aspirations or potential. They have not solved trust problems. Any metrics out there have not yet been effective. If convenient, I will explore the existing metrics and research how successful any of us are in managing to them or sustaining them.
Methodical Trustworthiness = Competence AND Honesty AND Dependability AND Benevolence.
Untrustworthiness = Incompetence OR Dishonesty OR Low Dependability OR Malevolence.
We have not achieved Methodical Trustworthiness.
Any trustworthiness methodology is not yet adopted.
There is a lot of saturation out there, which is not a sustainable pace.
Competency may or may not be the result of ethical values. The way we use our competency and recognise when we don't have the skills or experience determines how ethically we behave. Saving Changes...
