PSM II™ Assessment Competencies

PSM II™ Meta Patterns

The meta-patterns serve to understand the big picture concepts within the assessment. They describe the recurring situations, misunderstandings, and organizational dynamics that Scrum Masters routinely encounter in practice. Assessment questions are intentionally grounded in these patterns to reflect real-world decision making rather than theoretical scenarios. While the meta-patterns explain the context behind the questions, the competency model defines the competencies being measured by the responses.

• Control vs Coaching

• Dependence vs Self-Management

• Compliance vs Empiricism

• Harmony vs Learning

• Process Execution vs System Thinking

• Predictability vs Adaptation

• Activity vs Capability Growth

  
  

PSM II™ Competencies

The competency model provides the foundation for interpreting and applying the results of this assessment. Rather than measuring memorization of Scrum terminology or isolated knowledge of events and artifacts, the assessment evaluates how well a practitioner understands the practical application of Scrum in realistic situations. The competency model defines the specific capabilities being evaluated, allowing results to be viewed as indicators of professional readiness rather than simple test performance. It helps identify strengths, highlight developmental gaps, and guide focused improvement aligned with the expectations of an effective Professional Scrum Master.

Coaching Over Control.  PSM II is fundamentally testing whether the Scrum Master behaves as a coach rather than a manager. The emphasis is on enabling teams to think, decide, and learn instead of providing answers or directing outcomes. Questions often disguise control as “helpfulness” to see if you recognize the dependency risk.

Enabling Self-Management.  The Scrum Master’s real success metric is reduced dependency over time. This competency focuses on growing team autonomy, encouraging internal decision-making, and resisting the temptation to solve problems for the team. Many questions probe subtle anti-patterns where the Scrum Master becomes the bottleneck.

Protecting Empiricism.  PSM II questions repeatedly test whether you can recognize threats to transparency, inspection, and adaptation — even when those threats look reasonable. The Scrum Master protects the learning system rather than enforcing rules. Events, timeboxes, feedback loops, and Done increments are viewed through the lens of preserving empirical learning.

Psychological Safety and Team Dynamics.  Advanced Scrum Mastery requires understanding team behavior, not just framework mechanics. This competency focuses on creating conditions where conflict is productive, risks are surfaced, and silence is addressed as a signal rather than ignored. Many scenarios probe trust, safety, or unresolved interpersonal dynamics hiding behind process issues.

Servant Leadership and Influence.  PSM II moves beyond facilitation into leadership without authority. The Scrum Master influences through coaching, partnership, and example rather than enforcement. Questions often contrast influence-based leadership with compliance-driven behavior.

Continuous Improvement as Behavior Change.  Improvement is measured by changed outcomes and habits, not ceremonies or action lists. This competency tests whether retrospectives and learning loops actually translate into experimentation and adaptation. The Scrum Master focuses on sustainable change rather than meeting effectiveness.

System and Organizational Thinking.  At this level, problems are rarely isolated to one team. The Scrum Master learns to identify systemic impediments such as governance, funding models, leadership expectations, or organizational culture. Questions often shift focus from team-level fixes to broader organizational agility.

Managing Complexity and Uncertainty.  PSM II assumes complexity, ambiguity, and imperfect outcomes. The competency here is helping teams and organizations learn faster rather than pushing for certainty or predictability. Adaptation, experimentation, and incremental learning are the core responses to uncertainty.

Scaling Through Reduced Dependency.  Effectiveness at scale is measured by how little teams rely on the Scrum Master. This competency tests whether growth comes from multiplying capability rather than multiplying oversight. Becoming indispensable is treated as a failure pattern, not a success.