In recent days, the story that led to what I call “The Soham Parekh Syndrome” has sent shockwaves through the tech and startup world. An engineer working simultaneously for multiple remote startups, without transparency or full commitment — a situation that goes far beyond individual misconduct or sensational news. This syndrome is a serious lesson for all of us: when trust, psychological safety, and commitment are lost in the behavior of even one person, it can shape the perception of an entire industry.

Trust is the heartbeat of any team and any professional collaboration. In Agile and Scrum, we deeply value transparency, honesty, and true commitment. But trust is not just a nice slogan or a motivational poster on the wall; it means a deep belief that each person, even when unseen, carries out their responsibilities with integrity and courage. The Soham Parekh Syndrome showed us that it takes only one person choosing secrecy over transparency to break this fragile and invaluable bond — just like pulling a key block from a Jenga tower.

On the other hand, Soham admitted that the main reason behind his decision was financial struggles and an inability to talk about it. This is exactly where psychological safety becomes crucial: an environment where people can share their real challenges and needs without fear of judgment or punishment. The lack of this safety pushes people toward silence, lies, or hidden paths — and that silence is often the beginning of bigger crises.

Alongside these two pillars — trust and psychological safety — there is another critical value: commitment. In Scrum, commitment means a genuine dedication to shared goals and individual responsibility toward the team. When someone works for multiple teams at the same time and doesn’t fully commit to any, the quality, synergy, and collaborative culture inevitably suffer.

This syndrome reminds us that even one person breaking trust and commitment can damage the broader image of transparency and freedom in remote work. In this case, it started from a personal decision, not from a weak team or a flawed organizational culture. But this personal decision makes many companies start doubting remote work again, believing that without physical presence, it becomes harder to truly measure commitment and performance. As a result, proponents of micromanagement use these events as an excuse to return to control-heavy models, hour-tracking reports, and tighter oversight of employee activities. In other words, one individual mistake can become a justification for weakening collective trust and reverting to a culture of control and limitation.

Some may see the Soham Parekh Syndrome as just tabloid news or a passing headline. But for us — as leaders, coaches, and members of Agile teams — it’s a valuable opportunity to reflect. Do our teams truly have the space to openly share personal or work-related struggles? Do trust and commitment truly exist in practice, or are they just pretty words on posters?

Let’s turn this crisis into a real lesson and build teams that are more human, transparent, and committed.