When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths.
Agile Operating practice
Working Agreements
Helps a team agree on observable rules for behaviour, communication, and escalation.
Working Agreements make implicit ways of working visible. The team gathers individual needs, writes observable rules, and decides how to adapt them later.
Which observable agreements help this team collaborate reliably and respectfully?
- Participants
- 3-12
- Time
- 10 minutes of preparation and about 60 minutes for the first agreement; then ongoing use and regular reviews.
The initial session becomes an ongoing practice through use and review.

Context
Bound friction
Make current collaboration, occasion, and observed friction visible.
Perspectives
Gather needs
Record individual hours, communication, and feedback preferences separately.
Rules
Write observable norms
Turn needs into clear “we” rules with trigger and expected behavior.
Escalation
Clarify interfaces
Agree channels, response rules, decision ownership, and escalation path.
Maintenance
Plan review
Set review date, change path, and response when an agreement cannot be kept.
Observe rules in use, keep, change, or remove them at review, and renegotiate early after team changes.
A good fit when
Use them for team formation, onboarding, reorganization, or recurring misunderstandings.
Ideal for
- Team Kickoffs
- Retrospectives
- Distributed Teams
Not good for
- Formal policy replacement
- Conflicts without a willingness to align
Outputs

Reviewable agreement
Living working-agreement document with observable rules, communication channels, escalation path, exceptions, owner, and review rhythm.
Working agreements
Fictional example
Fictional agreements for a distributed product team.
Hours and focus
When are we available, when do we protect focus, and which exceptions apply?
Core overlap 10:00–15:00; no internal meetings 09:00–11:00 except incidents.
Communication channels
Which channel serves which purpose and what response is expected?
Board for work status; chat for coordination within one working day; phone only for production incidents.
Feedback and decisions
How do we give feedback and where are decisions recorded?
Critical feedback directly first; decisions with context in the decision log.
Blockers and escalation
When and to whom do we escalate?
Mark a blocker after four working hours; escalate to Team Lead and Product after one working day.
Review
When and through what process do rules change?
Review in six weeks and additionally after onboarding or reorganisation.
The examples are starting points for joint negotiation.
First step
Collect current friction points and give every participant room for individual preferences.
Deep dive
It collects desired behavior and turns it into explicit agreements with a recognizable scope. This reduces room for interpretation and lets the team adjust behavior more easily later.
Working Agreements work because they translate implicit expectations into verifiable team agreements, reducing everyday friction. They only become effective when the wording is concrete enough to give orientation in tricky situations while still being jointly owned. Pure feel-good statements help little; robust agreements, by contrast, create a reference point for recalibration when collaboration falters.
Start with typical everyday work situations, such as handovers, reviews, or response times, so the rules stay grounded. The round becomes meaningful only once a general wish turns into a sentence against which behavior can actually be checked later. Close with clearly prioritized agreements, a visible place in daily team life, and a fixed occasion for review.
The method guide walks execution through 5 phases, timing, 5 pitfalls, and clear stop criteria.
Open method guideYour perspective
Does this method help with your work?
Your feedback helps shape the next improvements to methodatlas.
Sources and topics
Working Agreements: WorksheetPlan the initial agreement, use, and review with clear ownership.markdown
working-agreements-checklist.md
Plan the initial agreement, use, and review with clear ownership.
Working Agreements: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Complete run Time: 10 minutes of preparation and about 60 minutes for the first agreement; then ongoing use and regular reviews.
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Shared document or board, individual work preferences, current friction examples, channel overview, and calendar.
- Roles: Whole team · facilitator · team lead as participant, not sole author · rotating agreement owner
- Advance information: Everyone notes working hours, focus time, feedback preferences, and current friction. The lead drafts at most communication and escalation questions, not finished rules.
- Overall time needed: 10 minutes of preparation and about 60 minutes for the first agreement; then ongoing use and regular reviews.
- Setup: Make existing rules visible, collect personal preferences silently first, and adopt only agreements the team can concretely try.
Prepare for the work steps
Context: Bound friction
- Everyone notes working hours, focus time, feedback preferences, and current friction. The lead drafts at most communication and escalation questions, not finished rules.
Perspectives: Gather needs
- Bounded friction situations
Rules: Write observable norms
- Visible work preferences
Escalation: Clarify interfaces
- Observable team rules
Maintenance: Plan review
- Communication and escalation path
Working agreements
Hours and focus
When are we available, when do we protect focus, and which exceptions apply?
...
Communication channels
Which channel serves which purpose and what response is expected?
...
Feedback and decisions
How do we give feedback and where are decisions recorded?
...
Blockers and escalation
When and to whom do we escalate?
...
Review
When and through what process do rules change?
...
Collect personal preferences, then agree on a few observable rules for a trial period.
Atlassian Working Agreements · original teaching example
Context: Bound friction
Expected artifact: Bounded friction situations
Bounded friction situations
Entry:
...
- Are friction points described as concrete situations without judging people?
Perspectives: Gather needs
Expected artifact: Visible work preferences
Visible work preferences
Entry:
...
- Could everyone contribute work conditions and feedback preferences independently?
Rules: Write observable norms
Expected artifact: Observable team rules
Observable team rules
Entry:
...
- Does each rule name a trigger and observable behaviour?
Escalation: Clarify interfaces
Expected artifact: Communication and escalation path
Communication and escalation path
Entry:
...
- For urgent and non-urgent cases, are channel and escalation path clear?
Maintenance: Plan review
Expected artifact: Reviewable agreement
Reviewable agreement
Entry:
...
- Can the team change rules that no longer work, and is the next review scheduled?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/working-agreements/run-sheet
Alternatives and neighbors
Fitting alternatives with decision guidance, followed by other related methods.

Instead of Working Agreements, choose Team Charter when you want to deliberately agree on collaboration, a shared target picture, and ground rules.

Sorts review, learning points, and friction into Liked, Learned, Lacked, and Longed For for concrete improvements.

Collects emotional signals from the team, clusters them into themes, and makes real conversation topics visible.

Makes a team's winds, anchors, risks, and target picture visible and turns the review into prioritized improvements.

Sorts practices into Start, Stop, More, Less, and Keep, so routine changes get chosen more deliberately.

Sorts team feedback into start, stop, and continue so the retrospective produces clear next steps.
Constraints and origin
Profile
- Method form
- Operating practice
- Participants
- 3-12
- Time
- 45-90 min
- Maturity
- Canonical
- Origin
- Praxisgemeinschaft

