Complete firstDecision subject
Bound one decision landscape and collect 12–30 concrete situations rather than abstract themes.
Without a clear boundary, cases and signals become mixed.
Method guideDecision Making
Cynefin Workshop
A practical method guide: clarify prerequisites and materials, understand the complete process, and look up outputs, pitfalls, and stop criteria.
ComplexityMedium
Time60-180 min
Participants4-20
FormatWorkshop
MaturityEstablished
01
Prerequisite
What needs to be finished first
Complete firstEvidence access
Concrete case cards, Cynefin domain surface, evidence notes, boundary area, and action log
Missing sources are marked as open assumptions.
02
Preparation
What needs to be ready before start
Materials
Concrete case cards, Cynefin domain surface, evidence notes, boundary area, and action log
People / roles
Facilitator experienced with Cynefin · case owners · domain perspectives · decision owner for experiments and stabilisation
Pre-read
Bound one decision landscape and collect 12–30 concrete situations rather than abstract themes.
Time needed
90–150 minutes for 12–30 concrete cases and derived response logics.
Setup
Divide the workspace into Collect cases · Calibrate domains · Sort independently · Test boundaries · Match response; keep sources, assumptions, and decisions separate.
03
Core question
The one question this method answers
Which context does each concrete case inhabit, and which decision logic fits it?
04
Flow
Phases with goal, actions, output and pitfall
A Cynefin workshop classifies situations by their degree of order, uncertainty, and complexity. The classification indicates where analysis, experiments, or rapid stabilisation fit.
Cynefin Workshop · working structure
Fictional example
Fictional values demonstrate the method-specific fields.
| Case | Evidence | Causality | Domain | Response | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Returns routineAdd rationale and evidence. | Same flow in 17 cases | Cause and effect known | Clear | Sense–categorise–respond | Continue standard |
| Machine selectionAdd rationale and evidence. | Three viable technical models | Several right answers; expertise required | Complicated | Sense–analyse–respond | Expert comparison |
| Express congestionAdd rationale and evidence. | Patterns differ by Saturday | Effect only clear in hindsight | Complex | Probe–sense–respond | Two safe slot probes |
| Coolant leakAdd rationale and evidence. | Immediate hazard | No time for analysis | Chaotic | Act–sense–respond | Isolate, then reassess |
1. Evidence
- Returns routine
- Same flow in 17 cases
- Machine selection
- Three viable technical models
- Express congestion
- Patterns differ by Saturday
- Coolant leak
- Immediate hazard
2. Causality
- Returns routine
- Cause and effect known
- Machine selection
- Several right answers; expertise required
- Express congestion
- Effect only clear in hindsight
- Coolant leak
- No time for analysis
3. Domain
- Returns routine
- Clear
- Machine selection
- Complicated
- Express congestion
- Complex
- Coolant leak
- Chaotic
4. Response
- Returns routine
- Sense–categorise–respond
- Machine selection
- Sense–analyse–respond
- Express congestion
- Probe–sense–respond
- Coolant leak
- Act–sense–respond
5. Next step
- Returns routine
- Continue standard
- Machine selection
- Expert comparison
- Express congestion
- Two safe slot probes
- Coolant leak
- Isolate, then reassess
All values are fictional.
- 1
Cases
Granular case set
Goal
Granular case set: Capture concrete situations as short stories with trigger, observed course, and current decision need.
Inputs for this step
- Bound one decision landscape and collect 12–30 concrete situations rather than abstract themes.
- Concrete case cards, Cynefin domain surface, evidence notes, boundary area, and action log
Actions
- Capture concrete situations as short stories with trigger, observed course, and current decision need.
Output
Granular case set
Capture concrete situations as short stories with trigger, observed course, and current decision need.
Quality check
Does each card describe an actual case rather than a category or solution wish?
Pitfall
Cards say process, culture, or digitalisation and cannot be placed meaningfully. Replace each category with an observed case, time, and decision.
Timing: 15–25 minutes
- 2
Domains
Shared domain criteria
Goal
Shared domain criteria: Explain Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, and Confused through causality and matching response logic.
Inputs for this step
- Granular case set
Actions
- Explain Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, and Confused through causality and matching response logic.
Output
Shared domain criteria
Explain Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, and Confused through causality and matching response logic.
Quality check
Can everyone explain domains through causality and response rather than importance or difficulty?
Pitfall
Complex is used as a synonym for difficult. Test one example per domain against causality and response logic.
Timing: 15–20 minutes
- 3
Sort
Provisional domain map
Goal
Provisional domain map: Place cases individually first, then compare rationale and evidence; keep genuine uncertainty in Confused.
Inputs for this step
- Shared domain criteria
Actions
- Place cases individually first, then compare rationale and evidence; keep genuine uncertainty in Confused.
Output
Provisional domain map
Place cases individually first, then compare rationale and evidence; keep genuine uncertainty in Confused.
Quality check
Is every placement justified by observable causality or lack of predictability?
Pitfall
The highest-ranking person sorts aloud and the group follows. Sort silently, reveal together, and discuss divergent rationales first.
Timing: 20–30 minutes
- 4
Boundaries
Resolved boundary cases
Goal
Resolved boundary cases: Examine disputed cases, movement between domains, and the Clear-to-Chaotic cliff; decompose bundles when needed.
Inputs for this step
- Provisional domain map
Actions
- Examine disputed cases, movement between domains, and the Clear-to-Chaotic cliff; decompose bundles when needed.
Output
Resolved boundary cases
Examine disputed cases, movement between domains, and the Clear-to-Chaotic cliff; decompose bundles when needed.
Quality check
Are divergent placements, domain movement, and subproblems visible?
Pitfall
The group forces one domain onto a bundle of different subproblems. Decompose the case and classify each subproblem with its own context and horizon.
Timing: 20–30 minutes
- 5
Respond
Context-aware action plan
Goal
Context-aware action plan: Choose a domain-appropriate response for each case; for complex cases define safe-to-fail probes and signals.
Inputs for this step
- Resolved boundary cases
Actions
- Choose a domain-appropriate response for each case; for complex cases define safe-to-fail probes and signals.
Output
Context-aware action plan
Choose a domain-appropriate response for each case; for complex cases define safe-to-fail probes and signals.
Quality check
Does each action match domain logic and have an owner, signal, and review?
Pitfall
A detailed long-range plan is mandated for a complex case before any probe. Define small parallel probes with amplification, dampening, and stop signals.
Timing: 20–35 minutes
05
Artifact
What comes out at the end
Sketch: what the artifact looks like
Form
Cynefin case map with domain rationale, boundary cases, and a matching response for each case.
Versioning / ownership
Record date, owner, evidence state, decision, and review; preserve earlier cycles.
Tool alternatives
- Cynefin domain surface
- Case cards with observable evidence
- Experiment and action log
cynefin-workshop-working-template.md
Set subject, evidence, roles, flow, and review.
Cynefin Workshop: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Complete run Time: 90–150 minutes for 12–30 concrete cases and derived response logics.
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Concrete case cards, Cynefin domain surface, evidence notes, boundary area, and action log
- Roles: Facilitator experienced with Cynefin · case owners · domain perspectives · decision owner for experiments and stabilisation
- Advance information: Bound one decision landscape and collect 12–30 concrete situations rather than abstract themes.
- Overall time needed: 90–150 minutes for 12–30 concrete cases and derived response logics.
- Setup: Divide the workspace into Collect cases · Calibrate domains · Sort independently · Test boundaries · Match response; keep sources, assumptions, and decisions separate.
Prepare for the work steps
Cases: Granular case set
- Bound one decision landscape and collect 12–30 concrete situations rather than abstract themes.
- Concrete case cards, Cynefin domain surface, evidence notes, boundary area, and action log
Domains: Shared domain criteria
- Granular case set
Sort: Provisional domain map
- Shared domain criteria
Boundaries: Resolved boundary cases
- Provisional domain map
Respond: Context-aware action plan
- Resolved boundary cases
Cynefin Workshop · working structure
| Case | Evidence | Causality | Domain | Response | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Returns routine | |||||
| Machine selection | |||||
| Express congestion | |||||
| Coolant leak |
- Returns routine: Add rationale and evidence.
- Machine selection: Add rationale and evidence.
- Express congestion: Add rationale and evidence.
- Coolant leak: Add rationale and evidence.
The blank worksheet contains prompts only.
Reference · original teaching example
Cases: Granular case set
Expected artifact: Granular case set
Capture concrete situations as short stories with trigger, observed course, and current decision need.
Entry:
...
- Does each card describe an actual case rather than a category or solution wish?
Domains: Shared domain criteria
Expected artifact: Shared domain criteria
Explain Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, and Confused through causality and matching response logic.
Entry:
...
- Can everyone explain domains through causality and response rather than importance or difficulty?
Sort: Provisional domain map
Expected artifact: Provisional domain map
Place cases individually first, then compare rationale and evidence; keep genuine uncertainty in Confused.
Entry:
...
- Is every placement justified by observable causality or lack of predictability?
Boundaries: Resolved boundary cases
Expected artifact: Resolved boundary cases
Examine disputed cases, movement between domains, and the Clear-to-Chaotic cliff; decompose bundles when needed.
Entry:
...
- Are divergent placements, domain movement, and subproblems visible?
Respond: Context-aware action plan
Expected artifact: Context-aware action plan
Choose a domain-appropriate response for each case; for complex cases define safe-to-fail probes and signals.
Entry:
...
- Does each action match domain logic and have an owner, signal, and review?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/cynefin-workshop/run-sheet
06
Example output
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional example for orientation. Counts and timings describe this case and are not universal requirements.
cynefin-workshop-beispiel.md
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional teaching example: Cynefin Workshop · working structure
| Case | Evidence | Causality | Domain | Response | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Returns routine | Same flow in 17 cases | Cause and effect known | Clear | Sense–categorise–respond | Continue standard |
| Machine selection | Three viable technical models | Several right answers; expertise required | Complicated | Sense–analyse–respond | Expert comparison |
| Express congestion | Patterns differ by Saturday | Effect only clear in hindsight | Complex | Probe–sense–respond | Two safe slot probes |
| Coolant leak | Immediate hazard | No time for analysis | Chaotic | Act–sense–respond | Isolate, then reassess |
07
Pitfalls
Recognize symptoms and steer against them
Quick overview, the full text is in the matching phase in the flow
- Granular case setCards say process, culture, or digitalisation and cannot be placed meaningfully.View in phase
- Shared domain criteriaComplex is used as a synonym for difficult.View in phase
- Provisional domain mapThe highest-ranking person sorts aloud and the group follows.View in phase
- Resolved boundary casesThe group forces one domain onto a bundle of different subproblems.View in phase
- Context-aware action planA detailed long-range plan is mandated for a complex case before any probe.View in phase
Trap
Granular case set
Symptom
Cards say process, culture, or digitalisation and cannot be placed meaningfully.
What to do
Replace each category with an observed case, time, and decision.
Trap
Shared domain criteria
Symptom
Complex is used as a synonym for difficult.
What to do
Test one example per domain against causality and response logic.
Trap
Provisional domain map
Symptom
The highest-ranking person sorts aloud and the group follows.
What to do
Sort silently, reveal together, and discuss divergent rationales first.
Trap
Resolved boundary cases
Symptom
The group forces one domain onto a bundle of different subproblems.
What to do
Decompose the case and classify each subproblem with its own context and horizon.
Trap
Context-aware action plan
Symptom
A detailed long-range plan is mandated for a complex case before any probe.
What to do
Define small parallel probes with amplification, dampening, and stop signals.
08
Stop criteria
When to pause, resolve prerequisites, or choose another approach
Stop Collect cases: Does each card describe an actual case rather than a category or solution wish?
Stop Calibrate domains: Can everyone explain domains through causality and response rather than importance or difficulty?
Stop Sort independently: Is every placement justified by observable causality or lack of predictability?
Stop Test boundaries: Are divergent placements, domain movement, and subproblems visible?
Stop Match response: Does each action match domain logic and have an owner, signal, and review?
Finished the method guide?
Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.